Things that self collapse or self measure

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter rodsika
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Collapse Measure Self
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of self-collapse or self-measurement in quantum systems, particularly in the context of the Copenhagen interpretation. Participants explore examples of systems that may exhibit self-collapse, such as radioactive decay and the formation of stars, while questioning the role of observers and the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire whether radioactive decay and the formation of stars can be considered examples of self-measurement, questioning how systems can collapse without observers.
  • There is a suggestion that an observer does not need to be a conscious entity; interactions between particles, such as an electron and a proton, can serve as observations.
  • One participant cites Euan Squires, stating that systems described by the Schrödinger equation cannot make measurements themselves.
  • Another participant argues that self-measurement does not exist for isolated quantum systems, which follow the Schrödinger equation, and that decoherence leads to the destruction of superpositions through environmental interactions.
  • There is a discussion about the distinction between collapse and mixture, with some participants asserting that decoherence results in a mixture rather than a true collapse of the wave function.
  • Questions are raised regarding what constitutes a classical measurement device during the Big Bang, given the absence of observers at that time.
  • One participant challenges the anthropocentric view of wave function collapse, suggesting that the concept is a fiction that misrepresents the role of absorbers in quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of self-collapse and measurement in quantum systems. There is no consensus on whether self-measurement exists or how it operates, particularly in historical contexts like the Big Bang.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight limitations in definitions and assumptions regarding measurement, collapse, and decoherence, as well as the implications of these concepts in quantum mechanics.

rodsika
Messages
278
Reaction score
2
Can you give example of systems that self collapse? For example, is radioactive decay an example of self measurement? How about 13 billion years ago when stars were just being formed, is it an example of self measurement? Because I can't imagine how stars can form when all things are in superposition. Please give other examples where things self collapse (or self measurement) occurs without observers in the context of the orthodox Copenhagen. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An observer doesn't have to be a person. An electron can observe a passing proton inside a star just fine. Observer just means something that the particle interacts with I believe. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong)
 
According to Euan Squires, in his book 'Conscious Mind in the Physical World':

... systems described by the Schrödinger equation, cannot themselves make measurements ...
 
rodsika said:
Can you give example of systems that self collapse?
Self measurement doesn't exist for quantum systems. When they are isolated, they obey Schrödinger's equation.

rodsika said:
How about 13 billion years ago when stars were just being formed, is it an example of self measurement? Because I can't imagine how stars can form when all things are in superposition.
The superpositions are destroyed due to interactions with the environment (this process is called decoherence). The environment in this case is the electromagnetic field. An ensemble of atoms, initially in a superposition state, thus evolves into an incoherent mixture, describeable by the Boltzmann distribution.
 
Drakkith said:
An observer doesn't have to be a person. An electron can observe a passing proton inside a star just fine. Observer just means something that the particle interacts with I believe. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong)
From a mathematical point of view, observation usually involves non-unitarian time evolution ("collapse"). Fundamental interactions, like electron-proton scattering, obey unitarian time evolution and constitute therefore no measurement.

In the Kopenhagen viewpoint, the collapse is caused by interacting with a "classical" measurement device (which as you said doesn't have to be a person).

In the Decoherence viewpoint, non-unitarian time evolution arises from interactions with an environment.
 
Last edited:
kith said:
From a mathematical point of view, observation usually involves non-unitarian time evolution ("collapse"). Fundamental interactions, like electron-proton scattering, obey unitarian time evolution and constitute therefore no measurement.

In the Kopenhagen viewpoint, the collapse is caused by interacting with a "classical" measurement device (which as you said doesn't have to be a person).

In the Decoherence viewpoint, non-unitarian time evolution arises from interactions with an environment.

So in the Big Bang. What serve as the classical measurement device to collapse
it? 13 Billion years ago. There were no humans yet. So how did the universe wave
function collapse? I can understand decoherence can turn it into mixture but
mixture is not really collapse. Collapse is differet from Mixture.
 
rodsika said:
So in the Big Bang. What serve as the classical measurement device to collapse
it? 13 Billion years ago. There were no humans yet. So how did the universe wave
function collapse? I can understand decoherence can turn it into mixture but
mixture is not really collapse. Collapse is differet from Mixture.

An observer doesn't have to be a person. It can be whatever interacts with the particles.
 
rodsika said:
So in the Big Bang. What serve as the classical measurement device to collapse it? 13 Billion years ago. There were no humans yet. So how did the universe wave
function collapse? I can understand decoherence can turn it into mixture but
mixture is not really collapse. Collapse is differet from Mixture.


no observers...

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1003/1003.5582v2.pdf

.
 
Would a typical modern-day Copenhagenist say that collapse occurs 'at the time of decoherence' and that collapse consists of random selection of one of the 'diagonal terms'?
 
  • #10
The ideation of "collapsing" is a pure anthropocentric fantasy.
As egocentric anthropocentrists, some ones has postulated that the time and causality in microphysics should be identical to our familiar time and causality in our macroscopical world governed by statistical emergences.
Their concept of "wave function" is a fiction engineered to represent their egocentric knowledge under the assumption that absorbers do not play any role in causality in microphysics, that in microphysics, absorbers do no exist, and only emitters and artillery exist.
The costs to pay are many, and all that fuss about "collapse" is one.

However the formalism contradicts the semantics the standard teaching wraps around.

Since the complete relativistic equation for fermions set up by Dirac in 1928, you have under you eyes the components with negative energy and negative frequencies. So since 1928 you do not need any more any magics of "collapse" to understand the convergence of any quanton wave on an absorber.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K