Wave particle in the same place

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jbrown832
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle Wave
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) and the observer effect, specifically questioning why multiple observers can point to the same location of a baseball in a room. The initial confusion arises from a misunderstanding of QM as a theory of possibility rather than probability. The response clarifies that QM is based on determinable quantities and that the light reflecting off the ball allows all observers to see it in the same position, debunking the notion of individual outcomes. The conversation emphasizes the importance of aligning theoretical understanding with observable reality.

PREREQUISITES
  • Basic understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with the observer effect in quantum physics
  • Knowledge of light behavior and reflection
  • Concept of probability vs. possibility in scientific contexts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of quantum mechanics, focusing on determinism and probability
  • Explore the observer effect and its implications in quantum physics
  • Investigate the behavior of light, including reflection and refraction
  • Read Amit Goswami's works for insights on consciousness and quantum theory
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators in quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of quantum theory and the observer effect.

Jbrown832
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

This is has been bugging me a while in regards to quantum physics and I figure this would be a good place to get an answer.

First off I'm no genius so forgive my very basic understanding of QM. I just share an interest in the subject and have garnered the things I do know from DVD's and mainly the work of Amit Goswami.

So here's the scenario that gets me...

QM is based on the idea of possibility, so say for example there's a room and in this room there is a baseball on the floor. You blind fold 10 people and have them walk into the room. They stand in segregated cubicles so neither person can see each other all they see is the room. Once all the blindfolds are off, you tell each person to point to where the ball is.

How come everybody points to the ball in the same place? It surely can't be coincidence that they've all collapsed the same wave particle in the same place or that everybody has 'picked' the same outcome. So what I'm getting at is, where is this possibility that QM talks about, there only ever seems to be one outcome for everyone.

If the observer effect does exist, who chooses the possible outcomes? Because this suggests it isn't individual but rather collective.

I hope someone can answers this, I may be totally mislead lol, but either way it educates me a little further.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Your question may need further refinement in order to answer your question.

My initial response to your question:
The reason each person sees the ball in the room in the position it is at is simply because the ball is physically located in that position AND the light reflected off of it is detected by the observers. The light reflecting from the ball is diffuse due to its surface - if it were a highly polished material like that of a mirror, it would produce specular reflection and by simple means of determination it would not be perceived as an object at all. However, because human beings are capable of identifying particular optical effects, in this case a reflective surface, it would be perceived as a highly reflective ball.

Your thought that QM is about possibility is likely the cause of your confusion. QM isn't fundamentally based on possibility - the word "probability" is a common word used in the science, but QM is fundamentally based on the idea that everything has determinable quantities rather than an infinite resolution. i.e. You cannot infinitely subdivide things.

From the way you put together your question it appears as though you are confused about the light itself that is radiating/reflecting from the ball. As if the light waves are traveling from the ball in a circular pattern, like that of the wave traveling across a pond that you just threw a ball into. And by what appears to be your logic, if an observer "sees" this wave front, it collapses into a particle only at THEIR retina - thereby eliminating the possibility of any other observer to see the ball. By this logic, it would also seem fit to say that the observer who is physically closer to the ball would be the only person seeing it.

We all know this isn't the case. :) However, trying to mentally model your hypothetical from the perspective that you are taking on how light radiates from an object will certainly lead one to think that what really happens shouldn't happen. The interpretation you have from what you have read has created a mental model in your mind that obviously does not fit the reality of the situation. Dont get caught up in trying to prove that reality is wrong based on something you read - reality is reality. Spend your effort in understanding the proposed theory such that it fits the reality of the hypothetical or develop your own theory.

:hint: it most likely will be less exhaustive to find the correct interpretation which the author is presenting. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K