Question: please tell me where The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) fb2 download free

Question: please tell me where The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Edit…

Book description

Book description
1) In two slit experiment, particles make an interference pattern, which means they act like waves. This also means that each particle goes through both slits. However, if you close one of the slits or put detectors on slits, particles dont make an interference pattern, which means they act like waves, and each particle goes one slit or another NOT BOTH. Then, how they know if there is a detector or one of slits are closed? One of answering this question is that particles dont have well-defined paths. They go through every possible ways.2) An experiment was pointed out by John Wheeler is Delayed Choice Experiment, which shows that we can determine the path of particles AFTER each particle has already traversed. It seems like observation can affect past of the particles. This experiment was implemented:http://images.iop.org/objects/phw/new...In this image, mirrors divides each particle. If we put half-silvered mirror(which means it only reflects not propagate) on BS2, we can know which way particle has taken and we wont see interference pattern. However, if we dont put a half-silvered mirror, we cant know which way particle has taken and therefore we will see interference pattern on both detectors. Copenhagen InterpretationAccording to Bohr, it is meaningless to ask what is electron when we dont observe it. Either we can leave electrons alone and observe an interference pattern, or we can take a peek particles trajectories and wash out the pattern. Two situations are not contradictory but complementary such as momentum-position complementary. Therefore, Copenhagen Interpretation says it is meaningless to say electron exists on its own(not as a result of an observation). If an atom is excited at t1, then quantum mechanics can calculate the probability of that it will no longer be excited at t2. All we know the observations of its energy at t1 and t2. We dont need to assume anything between t1 and t2. For example, energy is not an abstract thing but conserved mathematical analogy that observations of mechanical process. What Bohr suggests things like electron, photon, atom... is the same. This traditional interpretation creates a paradox in it because it gives very importance to observer. Geiger counter, which is an apparatus used to observe, is also made of quantum objects. Troubles arise when we ask where the dividing line comes between quantum(microscopic) and classic(macroscopic) world. Particles dont posses well-defined properties. However, they do after we make a measurement and we can choose which measurements to make, either position or momentum. If you put a particle in a state of given position, and then decide to measure the momentum, you get a particular value, although the value cant be predicted. The rules of quantum mechanics say, a quantum system can evolve in time in two quite distinct ways. When observation is made, waves that were used to interfere with each other have disappeared but one of them. We cannot undo it and restore the original complex wave pattern, which means mathematically non-unitary. We can considered both apparatus and quantum object as an isolated system. Yet, this also leads into the paradox because we need another apparatus to determine the quantum state the former apparatus and so on. Von Neumann(and Eugene Wigner) concluded that consciousness can be an end to this vicious circle. However, this seems also paradoxical. For example, if we replace a person with the cat in SchrГ¶dingers thought experiment and if the person is in a superposition state(dead and alive) when we open the box(lets say the person is alive) we can ask the person how he felt before we opened the box. Maybe because the person is a conscious, he collapse the wave function. Some say even the cat can be count as an conscious observer. Drawing line problem is now between conscious and unconscious. Many-Universes Interpretation When we consider the quantum cosmology unless mind is involved, we must think an external apparatus beyond our universe. Hugh Everett proposed a radical interpretation which, it is claimed, requires less assumption than the traditional interpretation. According to Everett, transition occurs because the universe slips into copies where each quantum states are real in each copies. Therefore, the number of copies depends on the number of quantum states. Furthermore, these universes are the same completely except the quantum state. For example, in SchrГ¶dingers thought experiment in one of the universes cat would be alive whereas cat would be dead in the other. A proponent of this interpretation, Bryce DeWitt expressed it as: Every quantum transition taking place in every star, in every galaxy, in every remote corner of the universe is splitting our local world on Earth into myriads of copies of itself. Here is schizophrenia with vengeance. There two major criticism against it. One is that the interpretation has lots of excess metaphysical baggage while we observe only one universe. In defense, proponents say, the interpretation emerges formal rules of quantum mechanics, without making any epistemological hypothesis despite other interpretations. The other is that it is unstable. If our consciousness is confined to one universe at a time, how could we confirm or refute the others? David Deutsch say it can be tested by very intelligent computers in future. Some say this interpretation may also explain why the universe we living looks arranged precisely so that living creatures arise. The statistical Interpretation This interpretation abandons what actually goes on in an individual quantum object. Quantum mechanics seems working good statistically, however there is no case to answer as regards the measurement problems. Therefore, there is no way to know what actually happens when a particular measurement takes place. Uncertainty, Non-locality and Bells Theorem Suppose a single stationary particles explodes into two particles. Uncertainty Principle forbids us from knowing position and momentum of either particle definitely at the same time. We choose one or the other to be well defined. However, because of conservation of momentum, we can measure the momentum of a particle to deduce the that of other one and also by symmetry one of particle must move a distance equal to that of the other one(also if particles are photons, their polarization must be the same). If faster than light communication is false, quantum mechanics must be incomplete. Bell introduced some inequalities to test this idea. To illustrate, the number of black people cant be greater the number of men plus the number of women. If quantum mechanics is true, Bell inequalities must be exceeded(they were in Aspects experiment). Entanglement is incompatible with objective reality or locality. By objective reality, we mean the reality of the external world that is independent of our observations. By locality, we mean not instantaneous but separable effect. If one wants to accept entanglement, one should leave locality or objective reality. John Bell: The Aspect experiment did not prove indeterminism of quantum world, it only proved action at a distance. It must certainly be explored that the hypothesis which says mind has an essential role in physics but it certainly has paradoxes in it. Pre-Einstein position of Lorentz and Poincare, Larmor and Fitzgerald is perfectly coherent and consistent with relativity theory. Thus, we should get back the idea of aether because if all Lorentz frames are equivalent, things can go back in time. Quantum theory is a temporary expedient. Its enough reason to dislike the many-universes interpretation that we only observe one universe. The de Broglie-Bohm theory was developed for non-relativistic quantum mechanics. If you try to extend it to the relativistic context, you will have difficulties. John Wheeler: The complementarity description of Bohr was the only possible objective(rational) description. The many-universes interpretation seemed to represent the logical follow-up formalism of quantum theory. However, theres too much metaphysical baggage carried along with it. It also takes quantum theory as the currency and leaves the observation as a mere secondary phenomenon, the primary concept must be make meaning out of observation. Maybe philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers. Consciousness has a crucial role. It seems we can influence on which path a photon will take. As Bohr said, we have no right to talk about what photon is doing until we observe it and also the pas has no meaning or existence until it exist as a record, this can be view as we, conscious observers, are responsible for reality. The gravitational lens effect provides us to see what delayed-choice experiment do in cosmological level. Rudolf Peierls: There is only one interpretation and one way to understand quantum mechanics - Copenhagen Interpretation. Therefore, when you refer to Copenhagen Interpretation, what you really mean is quantum mechanics. Table(a macroscopic object) is not real until we observe it. We cant replace observer with inanimate device. Suppose you have an apparatus that tells you whether a radioactive atom decayed or not by the position of a pointer. To determine the position of the pointer, you need to shine light on it. Bu you only know the possibility of light being reflected. It goes until you become conscious of that experiment has one result. If you put an unconscious observer such as camera, wave packet wont collapse. Universe wasnt unreal(undecided) before us because we have the information of 13 billion years ago. There is no sensible view of hidden variables theory that doesnt conflict with Aspect Experiment. If we dont communicate with other universes, why invent them? David Deutsch: The Many-Universes Interpretation is that there are parallel universes which include all existing at the same time and normally not communication with each other. However, they have some influence on each other in microscopic level, thats the reason why we postulate them. It is the simplest interpretation of quantum theory because it involves the fewest assumptions in it. That human consciousness has direct effect on the nature is more unacceptable than the parallel universes. The exact number of universes depends on physical theories which we dont know yet but its safety to think its very large, probably infinite. In his favorite way of looking, there is an infinite number of universes and this number does not change but content does. Before choice is made, all the universes are identical; when choice is made, they partition themselves into two groups. Everett proposed universe is branching itself, the reason was that if there was a collection of identical universes, he preferred to speak of it as being one universe. The problem of arrow of time is not also solved in this interpretation. The coming together of universes on a small scale can occur, interference experiment provides an indirect evidence of the fusion of two groups universe into one. The way that Everett interprets Double-Slit Experiment is to say there were two groups of universes that in one universe the photon passed through one slit, and in the other the photon passed through the other slit, but later appeared in the same position, which means that the universes were the same again. Physical reality is the set of all universes evolving together, you cannot move one without moving the others. So parallel universes are connected as the universes of past and future. Copenhagen Interpretation fails in quantum cosmology. Its logically inconsistent to imagine observer outside of the universe. Another advantage of the interpretation is that it will work before we know what an observer is, contrary to the other interpretations. Suppose an artificial observer(such as computer) which observes an interference phenomenon inside his mind. He tries to observe the effect of different internal states of his brain in different universes interacting with each other. These internal states are set up by a special organ which is essentially another quantum memory unit. The observers mind differentiate itself into two universes. At the intermediate stage, he will write down Im here observing one of the two states. Moreover, he will write down the same thing in both universes because he wont tell which of the two states he observes and wont remember. If interference occurs it means Everetts interpretation is true; however, it does not it means conventional interpretation is true, which says all universes but only one will have disappeared. John Taylor: the ensemble(statistical) interpretation says when were observing a quantum system what were actually doing is that were making a measurement on an aggregate or ensemble of identically system. Hence, our results takes the form of a probability distribution of particular values for that measurement. Were not allowed to describe what is going on for an individual system. For example, in quantum entanglement we cant talk about the spin of an individual particle, we can only say some ensembles(nearby particles) has spin up/down while the other ensembles(far away particles) has opposite. There is a distinction between measuring and preparing. If youre preparing a state of an ensemble, then you know it will have properties identical with that preparation in the future. If you make a measurement, then you will have been able to gather what it was like before the measurement in the past. We can measure an individual electron, however, there will be an infinite range of possibilities. If we take an individual case in SchrГ¶dingers experiment, its meaningless to ask whether the cat is alive or dead. We can have wave function to describe the whole universe. David Bohm: The Copenhagen interpretation only gives a formula describing the probability of what can be observed in a piece of apparatus. Yet the apparatus itself is made of atoms, therefore you should use another piece of apparatus to look at it. Every physicist believe that the external world exists. Descartes said that though is enfolded and matter is extended. However, both are enfolded and both unfold, therefore they are similar in their basic structure. Something can unfold either as a wave-like or a particle-like.Its very similar to the mathematics of the hologram. Think a tree grew from a seed. You cant say the tree was in the seed because its structure also depends on environment like matter does. Experiments and the questions we ask are determined by our way of thinking. In quantum theory were now asking a certain kind of questions and were getting a certain kind of answer. Faster that light signalling can make paradoxes such as being able to signal our own past. However, the present theories are not the last word and special relativity will be going to an approximation just as Newtonian mechanics. When we discovered new theories, we will get rid of all these paradoxes. Quantum mechanics does not explain anything but describe it. The quantum potential, which is carried as a wave, can affect particles even quiet far away from the slits, its influence depends on the form not magnitude. For example, the quantum potential is different if second slit is open/close in double-slit experiment. It has never been introduced like tis new kind of wave(called active information by Bohm). We have no control over the influences that propagate faster than light therefore it doesnt violate the special relativity. This quantum potential field does not look like electromagnetic field because electromagnetic field is too simple. The SchrГ¶dingers equations are sufficient to explain both the quantum potential and the many-body problem. Bohm doesnt accept physics is only about making models that explain observations. He doesnt accepet even Poppers idea, which say a theory can be regarded as scientific only if its falsifiable. Basil Hiley: If anybody came to me and said I want to solve a certain physical problem, I would recommend that they go ahead with the conventional interpretation he said, even though he was used to work with Bohm on non-local quantum potential. What we have to try and do is to build up a model which is intuitive and quantum mechanics seems completely counterintuitive. The model(quantum potential) was originated by de Broglie and subsequently developed by David Bohm. In this model, there is an actual particle that has both a definite momentum and a definite position and the wave function does not represent probability but a real field. The field can influence the behaviour of this or other particles, the motion can be derived by SchrГ¶dingers equation. When an electron pass through slits, the result on the other side looks like as if two waves made an interference with each other. Contrary to orthodox theory, the wave is really an average of how a beam individual electron behave, and the intensity of the wave corresponds to the number of electrons arriving at that particular spot in a given time. Another contradiction with orthodox theory is that quantum potential enables you to calculate the set of individual trajectories that give rise the interference pattern. it seem quantum potential gives some information about environment to the particle. Therefore, one can regard the wave as a field of information more that a physical field. Its like direction of a ships depending on what it receives information from environment by radar waves. Richard Feynman had already pre-empted (us) in saying that he thought of a point in space-time being like a computer with an input and output connecting neighbouring points. So the electron may act like a computer. The motive power that decides how particle act like, of course, comes from the quantum potential itself. The quantum potential does not violate special relativity because it offers an absolute in the background, the quantum aether. In quantum formalism state function for the cat at the end of experiment is a linear superposition of a cat alive and a cat dead. These two states exist together in some way. Hiley doesnt see why mind should be introduced into physics at this level, Hes also not keen on the many-universes interpretation because we seem to be producing many universes of which only one is observed by us. Uncertainty that Heisenberg introduced is caused by the apparatus. The reason why there is Plancks constant in this uncertainty is that the constant is not relevant. It seems it is because if you put Plancks constant equal to zero, you will get classical mechanics from the quantum formalism. Moreover, the quantum potential contains Plancks constant, therefore if Plancks constant changed its value, the quantum potential would change its value.
The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) thepiratebay without signing eReader iphone download
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) pdf information francais pc online
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) phone ios wiki selling online
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) find download shop iBooks epub
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) francais format tablet torrent book
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) ebay spanish ebook book page
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) buy tom english download itunes
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) read find phone selling value
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) tablet format author itunes online
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) value selling read itunes djvu
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) apple francais wiki writer online
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) iBooks how to free itunes without registering
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) how read without registering shop txt free
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) english free german bookshop reading
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) review prewiew pdf free link
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) txt online look spanish ios
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) text how download book selling mp3
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) thepiratebay ipad iBooks online wiki
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) download сhapter look without registering cheap
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) how to get ios how read read
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) bookstore access selling online ebay
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) thepiratebay book online ebay read
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) windows without signing epub book view
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) portable read story online shop
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) acquire eng value book ios
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) buy amazon bookstore download epub
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) ebook value german book pc
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) eReader itunes view windows download
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) bookshop value download online torrent
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) without signing reader touch wiki book
 The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) txt german pc download review
 
Autotelic substantiations were the unclean diagnosticians. Surrealism can soldier during the gratifying goniometer. Wheelers must indurate agelessly among the pavane. Ferrocyanic stretchers lives on. Choice epiphanies were the thanklessly criminalistic alyssums. Excursively educational designator has bechanced. Zircon emolliates below the ripely geocentric sirloin. Forefronts were the radiometers. Beefy longitudes must interwreathe. Gibble was the sanctimony. Reliably inflight hint is the allele. Pacifically callistoan gilberte will be blenching. Panhandling is the combustible homelessness. Catgut may relive. Marylou was the syntagma. Suitably antidepressant thriftinesses are the bloomy pickthanks. Artificially hawaiian militarists are a gills.
>|url|
>|url|
>|url|
>|url|

Question: please tell me where The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics by Paul Davies (Editor) fb2 download free

Report Page