Why Does Matter Become Solid When Observed? Max Planck's Theory

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dieter007
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter Solid
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of matter and its solidity in relation to observation, particularly referencing the double slit experiment and Max Planck's theories. Participants explore the implications of observation in quantum mechanics and the philosophical interpretations of matter's existence.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that matter only becomes solid when observed, referencing the double slit experiment as evidence of particles transitioning from a wave state to a solid state upon observation.
  • Others argue that the term 'solid' describes an aggregation of atoms and that observation does not imply a conscious observer; rather, physics aims to model observations without invoking intelligence.
  • A participant suggests that nature itself may be observing through interactions, implying a broader interpretation of observation beyond human perception.
  • Another participant challenges the interpretation of the double slit experiment, stating that it shows particles lack definite positions until observed, but this does not equate to solidity in the classical sense.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of solidity, with one participant explaining that all materials deform under pressure and that solidity is a matter of scale and context, rather than a definitive state.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between observation and the solidity of matter. There is no consensus on whether observation is necessary for matter to be considered solid, and the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of quantum mechanics and the need to differentiate between classical and quantum understandings of solidity and observation. There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of observation and solidity in the context of quantum physics.

dieter007
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
The double slit experiment shows, that particle only become solid when observed, shouldn't be matter behind walls aka where it is not watched be only a potential wave and not be solid at all?
Is that what Max Planck meant when he said:

“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”

so something has to be watching everything we call matter but is not viewable to the humand/animal eye, or it would vanish into pissibility?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Dieter, :welcome:

'Solid' is a term we reserve to describe an aggregation mode of many many atoms/molecules.
There is nothing watching everything. All we do in physics is try to describe what we observe and cast that in models (theories) that can be tested by allowing predictions to be verified or falsified. In the latter case the theory is usually abandoned.

I don't think Planck's quote is still considered sensible. In fact I find it internally contradictory: "Da es I am ganzen Weltall aber weder eine intelligente Kraft noch eine ewige Kraft gibt" followed by "so müssen wir hinter dieser Kraft einen bewußten intelligenten Geist annehmen" ?
 
Hi BvU,
but it is well observed, that atoms and small particles only break free from beeing possibility wave, in the double slit experiment, when they are observed. Therefore isn't it right to assume something is observing the whole thing which is behind/under walls or floors, or it would return into beeing a possibility wave?
 
if I have to argue about this stuff I would say nature is observing itself...or at least the interactions of the wall and the great heat sink that is the universe that surrounds it.

I am pretty certain walls remain in tact when no human is watching.

as far as "pissibility" I refrain from comment.
 
dieter007 said:
The double slit experiment shows, that particle only become solid when observed,
dieter007 said:
but it is well observed, that atoms and small particles only break free from beeing possibility wave, in the double slit experiment, when they are observed
The double-slit experiment shows no such thing. It does show that particles do not have a definite position unless and until the position is observed - but the word "observe" means something very different in quantum mechanics than it does in ordinary English, and "definite position" has very little to do with solidity. Unless you want to spend some time learning quantum mechanics (and the first step in that process is unlearning the things you think you know that just aren't so) It's best to start with a classical understanding of solidity.

In fact, no object is completely solid; if you press on the surface it deforms. Materials like hardened steel deform only slightly even under enormous forces so we ignore the deformation and think of them as completely rigid, while materials like rubber deform more easily. Some materials spring back to their original shape after being deformed and other's don't; the surface of a sandy beach is more rigid than the surface of a trampoline, but it's a lot easier to leave footprints on the beach than on the trampoline.

All of these effects can be calculated from the interactions between the atoms that make up an object with each other and with the atoms that make up whatever is pressing on it. However, the individual particles are never pressing on one another the way that one billiard ball presses on another; all the forces are coming from the electromagnetic interactions between the charged particles (electrons and nuclei) that make up these atoms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
11K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K