Tag: Quantum mechanics

Einstein, Schrodinger, and the reluctance to give up hard determinism

Ethan Siegel on his Starts With a Bang blog has an interesting review of Paul Halpern's new book on Einstein and Schrodinger, and their refusal to allow the implications of quantum physics to dissuade them from idea that the universe is strictly deterministic.  It's an interesting post and one that I recommend reading in full. … Continue reading Einstein, Schrodinger, and the reluctance to give up hard determinism →

New interpretation of quantum physics: Many Interacting Worlds

There's a new interpretation of quantum mechanics: Scientists propose existence and interaction of parallel worlds: Many Interacting Worlds theory challenges foundations of quantum science -- ScienceDaily. This new interpretation appears to be similar to the MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation) where quantum superpositions don't collapse, but spread, creating what amounts to new universes.  However, in this theory, … Continue reading New interpretation of quantum physics: Many Interacting Worlds →

Biology uses quantum effects.

When I first saw this article by Jim Al-Khalili and Johnjoe McFadden, my skeptical reflex kicked and I was, well, skeptical.  Often when quantum mechanics gets mentioned with biology, it's questionable material.  But I've seen enough of Al-Khalili's other work, and as President of the British Humanist Association, I'm not inclined to think he's subject to being … Continue reading Biology uses quantum effects. →

Why is there something rather than nothing? Why would there be nothing?

Amanda Gefter has an interesting article at Nautilus looking at a somewhat perennial question: How can something come from nothing? The Bridge From Nowhere - Issue 16: Nothingness - Nautilus. In science, explanations are built of cause and effect. But if nothing is truly nothing, it lacks the power to cause. It’s not simply that we … Continue reading Why is there something rather than nothing? Why would there be nothing? →

The double slit experiment and the utter strangeness of quantum mechanics

Occasionally I remark about how illogical quantum mechanics is.  Sometimes people either insist that it is logical, or simply assert some simple explanation that shows they don't really get how utterly strange this stuff is. This video of Jim Al-Khalili gives a relatively brief explanation of this experiment, including its freaky results. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ If Al-Khalili doesn't strike … Continue reading The double slit experiment and the utter strangeness of quantum mechanics →

Does the Higgs boson actually exist?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azTMPl0Qb6o I have to admit to wondering the same thing Nick talks about here.  Do any of these subatomic particles actually exist?  At least in the way we conventionally define "exist"?  We're talking about entities that are sometimes a wave, sometimes a point particle and, as far as we can observe, behave randomly within certain … Continue reading Does the Higgs boson actually exist? →

Does the mind affect quantum mechanics?

Tom Hartsfield at Real Clear Science has a nice short piece that explains why your mind isn't involved (at least not directly) in what happens in quantum mechanics: Does the Mind Affect Quantum Mechanics? | RealClearScience. Every measurement that you can name boils down to an interaction. You poke the quantum system with something (light, a … Continue reading Does the mind affect quantum mechanics? →

Sean Carroll makes the case for the Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics

Sean Carroll has posted a passionate defense of the Many-world interpretation to quantum mechanics. I have often talked about the Many-Worlds or Everett approach to quantum mechanics — here’s an explanatory video, an excerpt from From Eternity to Here, and slides from a talk. But I don’t think I’ve ever explained as persuasively as possible why I think it’s the right approach. So that’s what … Continue reading Sean Carroll makes the case for the Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics →