Ken said:
Ken Smith wrote: [...]
Your web site states:
The Ensemble Interpretation does not attempt any explanation as to
why Quantum Mechanics is the way it is. It simply states the most
rational way of interpreting and calculating the results without
introducing the blatant contradictions that are indeed in the
Copenhagen interpretation, in addition to removing all excess
metaphysical baggage.
So it isn't really talking about what the true state of affairs for
Shrodinger's cat is.
It says that there is no *actual* combined state, i.e. no *real*
simultaneous dead and alive state. That is, |phy> = |a> + |b> is
mathematical *notation*.
I disagree. What it really says is that the theory does not address
the question of why the calculations work.
That's correct, it doesn't address why the calculations work from a
physical point of view, but this directly means that it doesn't require
that an object can be simultaneously in two states. As I keep pointing
out, if we take the classical ensemble of dice throwing, there is
obviously no need to introduce the concept of the dice being in 6 states
at once, so why do it for the quantum case? The same math works the same
in both cases. Introducing a multistate condition is superfluous, so
again, why do it? Its an add on that has give us no new information.
It proposes a method of
calculation that seems to always be verified by our experiments.
There was a time when classic physics was in this same position. The
theory and calculations seemed to mathc evry experiment. Then
someone found that things like orbit of Mercury did not match the
theory. Until two way communication is done by quantum entanglement,
FTL is at risk of being disproven.
If it is that wave function for a
cat will look much better.
I dont see that this follows at all.
[...]
If we don't need an idea, that on its face is daft, why hold on
it it?
I don't see it as "daft".
Of course it is.
It is troubling and counterintuitive but
not daft.
The adage here is that it has become fashionable to believe in daft
ideas.
People think that their cool for convincing themselves that they think
they understand a counterintuitive idea, and that others are too stupid
to understand how they have seen the light. Sure, there are
counterintuitive ideas that are valid, but many in QM are not. They came
about when people were just developing the theory and knew no better.
For example, I gave this link in my paper
http://www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm11.htm#ind part int.
e.g. "This may be due to the popular idea of particle-wave duality,
having been developed in the Copenhagen interpretation during the early
stages of the development of quantum mechanics, but being obsolete by
now."
Many are simply stuck in the mud of 80 year old dated QM ideas. One
needs to move on. QM simply doesn't require most of the daft ideas that
were originally associated with QM, So, as I keep saying, why use them?.
The basic reason for claims like "two states at once" is that one is
trying to force a classical description on to something that doesn't
have a classical description. Obviously, this will cause a logical
contradiction, as indeed it does.
Kevin Aylward
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
