Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Quantum Entanglement and Superdeterminism

Page 2 of 2 [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

19 Dec 2021, 6:58 am

thinkinginpictures wrote:
What I'm asking for is How Randomness is Composed. What makes something random?
Various mechanisms, some of them known, some of them unknown. Sometimes it can be mathematically described as chaos - undetectable differences in the input result in unpredictable differences in the output.
The thing is, a system with randomness behaves accordingly to probablity theory and statistics. And, to make things more fun, randomness of particles can result in predictability of the whole system (e.g. gas mechanics).
thinkinginpictures wrote:
Which mechanics governs the randomness itself?
Statistics. The Math of randomness.

It's just a fallacy of human intuition that we find determinism obvious but randomness troubles us. We could as well take it the other way around and be bothered by determinism.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

19 Dec 2021, 9:49 am

magz wrote:
thinkinginpictures wrote:
What I'm asking for is How Randomness is Composed. What makes something random?
Various mechanisms, some of them known, some of them unknown. Sometimes it can be mathematically described as chaos - undetectable differences in the input result in unpredictable differences in the output.
The thing is, a system with randomness behaves accordingly to probablity theory and statistics. And, to make things more fun, randomness of particles can result in predictability of the whole system (e.g. gas mechanics).
thinkinginpictures wrote:
Which mechanics governs the randomness itself?
Statistics. The Math of randomness.

It's just a fallacy of human intuition that we find determinism obvious but randomness troubles us. We could as well take it the other way around and be bothered by determinism.


When an apple fall from the tree and rolls down the ground, it does so in various random ways.
But ultimately you can trace all this back to initial conditions which - if you have 100 % knowledge of them all, can predict the exact movement of the apple.

Therefore chaos is not an adequate description of the origin of randomness, since there are variables which - although hidden from us - still exists in the real world.

In other words, randomness is just a term for "variables we don't know about".
If we were to know about these variables, seemingly random events can be described using determinism.

Now, quantum randomness is an entirely different thing altogether, since the particles need not to be governed by chaos in order to give random results.

Quantum randomness is said to be genuinly random, and that is the type of randomness I want to know the origin of, so that it too can be described deterministically.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

19 Dec 2021, 10:30 am

Yes, quantum randomness is, to our best knowledge available, genuinely and fundamentally random.
The only problem with it is that it doesn't fit typical human imagination.
Many things about quantum mechanics don't fit human imagination. But they precisely fit experimental results - so the problem is on the human imagination side.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,111
Location: Midwest

19 Dec 2021, 10:41 am

thinkinginpictures wrote:
QuantumChemist wrote:
My hypothesis on quantum entanglement of particles involves multiple dimensionality. When electromagnetic energy undergoes E => mc^2 to form particles, the dimensions involved may be greater than 4-D. Light energy is bent in this process from it’s typical coil into more complex shapes. Using String Theory, particle formation can lead to a connecting thread (think vectors) between two or more particles that we cannot see in our dimensionality. When one particle is acted upon, the other particle will react via that connection. The distance between particles can be huge in our dimension, but very small in a much higher one. In fact, there might not be a distance difference at all.

I have an example that can show this behavior. Take a piece of paper and fold it in half. Next, thread a needle with a piece of string and pierce the paper throughout both sides. The holes in the paper represent particle being formed. Tie a knot at both sides of the string after removing the needle first. Unfold the paper and you will see that the holes are apart on the surface of the paper. This surface represents our 4-D dimensionality (space time). Lay the paper flat and then tug at one end of the string. Both holes would be affected by the movement of the string. We cannot see the connecting string if we are only positioned on the flat plain of the paper. To us, the movement of both holes would look spooky as they both act at the same time. That is the effect of quantum entanglement upon particles.


It's not new, it is known as String Theory and it is close to be be proved false (if it haven't already).

The thing is there is no evidence for string theory to be right. And even if it is right, there are multiple models of string theories - hundreds of thousands of them many of which theoretical physicists haven't discovered yet. This means that if string theory is correct, nobody knows which string theory/model is the correct one.

It's like looking for a needle in a haystack. Just that it is a very tiny needle in a cosmologically big haystack.


Sorry but I believe you are completely wrong on this. Until String Theory has been absolutely been proven false, my viewpoint will stay the same. I use an adaptive version of it and can explain things that cannot be explained by any other models. With it, I have a unique understanding of what causes anti-matter and why it is not found in equal amounts in the universe. I know why the W and Z particles act the way that they do. Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity is the key to this model and it does match up with Richard Feynman’s approach to dealing with anti-matter in his energy diagrams.



thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

23 Dec 2021, 6:54 am

I've read some pages in a book titled Something Deeply Hidden by Sean Carroll.

It really explained the quantum phenomena quite well and you get a much better understanding of the phenomena including the "randomness" and how it works.

If you have a wave function you can know everything about it with certainty. But if you know it's position, you lose track of the momentum and vice-versa. Makes sense when you're talking about waves.

I can highly recommend this book.