About
Why Quantum Mechanics is Non-sense?
Series #8( Last checked 2024/11/10 - The estate of Paul Marmet )
Goto:Next Series of questions
Go to: Previous series of questions
The Fundamental reasons for which we do not accept the interpretation of Modern Physics, as supported by the establishment, is because we believe that it is pure non-sense. We are convinced that a logical explanation exists to describe Nature. Let us prove that it is non-sense.
1
-
The
Copenhagen Interpretation
The
interpretation
of
Modern
Physics is based on the Copenhagen Interpretation. The
Copenhagen Interpretation (described below) is not compatible
with Physical Reality. Physical Reality is a model in
which it is believed that physical phenomena exist
independently of any observer. We deeply believe in
Physical Reality.
In
order
to
be
compatible with the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum
Mechanics, we have to accept that Matter does not exist until
an observer looks at it. We do not accept that. On the
contrary, we firmly believe that all physical phenomena exist
independently of any observer. Consequently, the
explanations in Modern Physics are wrong because they rely on
the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Many
physicists are not aware that the interpretation of modern
physics implies that matter does not exist independently of
the observer. It is taught that it is the observer's knowledge
that creates the physical result. Mathematically, the
result is called the Collapse of the Wave Function at the
moment the observer makes the observations. For example, the
Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics implies that,
when a tree falls in a forest, there is no noise if there is
no observer.
2
-
What
Exactly is the Copenhagen Interpretation?
It
is
an
interpretation
given to the formalism of modern physics in order to give a
physical meaning of the terms used in the equations. The
Copenhagen interpretation has been written by a few renowned
scientists at the beginning of the 20th Century. The main
description comes from papers written by Niels Bohr, Werner
Heisenberg, M. Pauli and others. The Copenhagen
interpretation leads to the most astonishing set of
contradictions that ever existed in science. Those
contradictions are usually presented under the devious name of
paradoxes, because that expression seems less absurd.
3 - Causality
Causality
is
the
belief
issued from logic, in which every physical change implies a
cause, to generate that change. Nothing is created from
nonexistence. We firmly believe that a cause is always
essential. The Copenhagen Interpretation claims that
Modern Physics does not always require a cause!
4
-
Who
proposed the Copenhagen Interpretation of Modern Physics?
The
most
renowned
physicists
of the 20th Century. Very surprisingly, they support the
idea that Matter does not exist until an observer looks at it.
5
-
This
seems quite unbelievable. Is that general compliance a
real fact?
That
is
unquestionable.
Here
are some exact statements expressed by those scientists. The
complete references to all the citations below are given at
www.newtonphysics.on.ca/HEISENBERG/Contents.html
Heisenberg wrote [1]:
"The
law
of
causality is no longer applied in quantum theory."
We
believe
that
this is non-sense.
6
-
Does
the Copenhagen Interpretation solve the problems of Modern
Physics?
Certainly
not.
Murray
Gell-Mann writes [2]:
"Niels
Bohr
brainwashed
the
whole generation of theorists into thinking that the job
[that is an adequate presentation of quantum mechanics]
was done 50 years ago."
Also,
Feynman
said
[3]:
"I
think
it
is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics."
7
-
Do
some scientists recognize that it is some sort of hoax?
Some
scientists
recognize
it. However, most of them keep supporting it.
Mermin, one of the most
respected physicist wrote [4]:
"The
EPR
experiment
is as close to magic as any physical phenomenon I know of,
and magic should be enjoyed."
Feynman wrote [5]:
"The
theory
of
quantum
electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point
of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with
experiments. So I hope you can accept Nature as she is -
absurd."
Popper mentions [6]:
"The
Copenhagen
interpretation
-
or, more precisely, the view of the status of quantum
mechanics which Bohr and Heisenberg defended - was, quite
simply, that quantum mechanics was the last, the final,
the never-to-be-surpassed revolution in physics. [...]
These were claimed to show that physics has reached the
end of the road." . . . "this
epistemological claim I regarded, and still regard, as
outrageous."
On
page
9
of [6], Popper expressed his deception in
the following way:
"It was he
[Heisenberg] who led a generation of physicists to accept
the absurd view that one can learn from quantum
mechanics."
8
-
Wave-Particle
Duality
One
of
the
most
important and disastrous consequences of the Copenhagen
interpretation is revealed in the case of the dualist
wave-particle interpretation of light. It is believed
that light is simultaneously a wave and a particle. The
dualistic interpretation of light is a consequence of the
belief that Matter does not exist until an observer looks at
it. The dualistic model claims that if the observer
looks at light as a particle, he finds a particle. If
the observer looks at light as a wave, he finds a wave.
Things are created by the observer's knowledge. We
believe that this does not make sense.
This
idea
is
reported by Messiah when he writes [7]:
"Microscopic
objects
have
a
very general property: they appear under two apparently
irreconcilable aspects, the wave aspect on the one hand,
exhibiting the superposition property characteristic of
waves, and the corpuscular aspect on the other hand,
namely localized grains of energy and momentum."
Heisenberg writes [8]:
"The
paradoxes
of
the
dualism between wave picture and particle picture were not
solved; they were hidden somehow in the mathematical
scheme."
9
-
Philosophical
Support
Following
Descartes,
Bishop
Berkeley believed that observations are merely mental
constructions.
Berkeley wrote [9]:
"It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing amongst
men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in word all
sensible objects have an existence natural or real,
distinct from their being perceived by the understanding."
Berkeley
also
writes
[10]:
"Some truths there are so near and obvious to the mind,
that a man need only open his eyes to see them. Such I
take this important one to be, to wit, that all the choir
of heaven and furniture of the earth, in a word all those
bodies which compose the mighty frame of the world have
not any subsistence without a mind, that their being is to
be perceived or known."
Heisenberg
writes
clearly
that he agrees with Berkeley's philosophy. Let us recall
Heisenberg's own words [11]:
"The next step was taken by Berkeley. If actually all
our knowledge is derived from perception, there is no
meaning in the statement that the things really exist;
because if the perception is given it cannot possibly make
any difference whether the things exist or do not exist.
Therefore, to be perceived is identical with existence."
Berkeley's
absurd
ideas
are
so respected in the 20th Century that they named the famous
university of Berkeley in California in his honor. Also,
the city of Berkeley in California is also named after
him. This is reported in [12]:
10
-
Schrödinger's
Cat
Schrödinger's
cat
experiment
illustrates
the problem of realism and non-causality in quantum mechanics.
This experiment can be described in the following way. An
ideally isolated system is prepared so that it contains a
Geiger counter placed near a radioactive source emitting g
rays. The intensity of the source of g rays is adjusted so
that, in a period of one hour, it has exactly 50% probability
of causing the Geiger counter to record one count. The counter
mechanism is connected to a device which, if a count occurs,
will shatter a flask of deadly poison that will then fill the
box where the cat is located. There is a 50% probability
that no count will occur leaving the flask intact.
The
experimenter
seals
the
box and leaves the system undisturbed for one hour. At the end
of the hour, Schrödinger's question is:
"What
is
the
quantum-mechanical state of the system immediately before
the box is opened and the observation is made?"
John
J.
Cramer
writes [13] that the result of the
experiment is not decided and does not exist
"until
such
time
as
the observer collapses the state vector into one or the
other of these states by making an observation, since it
is the change in the observer's knowledge that
precipitates the state vector collapse."
Of
course,
such
a
description does not make sense. Without an observer, there is
no collapse of the wave function. Davies writes [14]:
"Its
(cat)
fate
is only determined when the experimenter opens the box and
peers in to check on the cat's health."
Davies [14] adds:
"The
cat
must
continue
to endure its suspended animation, until either finally
dispatched from its purgatory, or resurrected to a full
life."
Heisenberg
suggested
a
third possibility in which it is neither true nor false that
the cat is alive. He [15] writes :
"In
classical
logic
it
is assumed that, if a statement has any meaning at all,
either the statement or the negation of the statement must
be correct. Of "here is a table" or "here is not a table",
either the first or the second statement must be correct.
"Tertium non datur", a third possibility does not exist.
It may be that we do not know whether the statement or its
negation is correct; but in "reality" one of the two is
correct".
In
quantum
theory
this
law "tertium non datur" is to be modified."
Heisenberg
insists
even
more. He writes [15]:
"Let
us
consider
an
atom moving in a closed box which is divided by a wall
into two equal parts. The wall may have a very small hole
so that the atom can go through. Then the atom can,
according to classical logic, be either in the left half
of the box or in the right half. There is no third
possibility: "tertium non datur". In quantum theory,
however, we have to admit - if we use the word "atom" and
"box" at all - that there is other possibilities which are
in a strange way mixtures of the two former possibilities.
This is necessary for explaining the results of our
experiments."
Heisenberg's
paradox
has
been substituted by a human by Wigner. Davies writes [16]:
"According
to
Wigner's
theory before there was intelligent life, the universe did
not really exist."
Arthur
Fine
reports
[17].
"The
usual
way
is
to say nothing about the actual experimental situation. In
the tranquilizing philosophy of the schools - to use
Einstein's lovely phrase - we are simply told, Don't ask!"
11
-
Freedom
of Speech and Censorship.
Let
us
give
a citation by Lovelock about the freedom of expression in
research. He wrote [18]:
"To cap it all, in
recent years, the "purity" of science has been ever more
closely guarded by a self-imposed inquisition called the
peer review. [...] Like the inquisition of the medieval
church, it has teeth and can wreck a career by refusing
funds for research or by censoring publications."
There is no hope for new scientists to write new papers to rationalize physics, unless they accept to end up their career. This is what you have to pay now.
Paul Marmet
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Series #8 Quantum Mechanics November 2000