About
Why Quantum Mechanics is Non-sense?
Series #8( Last checked 2017/01/15 - 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. Some centuries ago, they burned Bruno and imprisoned Galileo.
Paul Marmet
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Series #8 Quantum Mechanics November 2000