Friday, September 09, 2011

Quantum Mechanics Questions : Specifically Regarding Bell's Theorm or InEquality Experiment

Every once in awhile, i’ll reignite my interest in Quantum Mechanics and Try to find a really clear Article or Book that Explains / Describes some or all of The Principle Experiments,
And Not Just ( Merely States ) The Results, Conclusions &/or Their Interpretation.

This last Round yielded what may be The Best ( But Still Deeply Flawed ) Description of Bell’s Inequality Experiment.

And it seems completely Bogus to me.
Why would All of The Worlds Physicists allow themselves to become so thoroughly confused by this Experiment?

Could you Clear a Few Things Up :

Also: If you do Offer an Explanations;
Please :
Do Not call me a Moron and Refer me to ANY Grade School Science Text Book.
Use Mathematical Formulas to Express An Idea that should be a Physical Description of Actual Particles, Not ‘Theoretical’ Particles.
- i don’t believe that Mathematics have anything to do with Physical Reality, which may be a Major Cause of much of This Confusion. Many Physicists apparently believe that there is a 1:1 Correspondence with Any, Absolutely Any, Mathematical Demonstration, Graph or Proof, with The Physical Universe.
- On The Most Elemental Level, Mathematics are A ‘Creation’ of The Human Mind, And Digitally Accurate to ( x degree ), While The Physical Universe ( If we are not living in a Matrix Construct created by Evil Robots or Spiritual Alien Daemons ) is Real, with Infinite Precision, While All Particles are Interacting with All ( ? ) Other Particles via Electromagnetic & Gravitational Fields. There is No Comparison.
-  Mathematical ‘Expressions’ may be minimally useful in determining The Capacitance of a Simple Electronic Circuit, But all Predictions or Measurements of Reality are Deeply Flawed.

i Further Believe that Any Genuine ‘Idea’ that is Clearly Understood at a Fundimental Level, 
May ( Should or Could ) be Expressed in Simple Language, 
( Compartmentalized & Hierarchically Arranged ) 
So that it may be Easily Understood by An Attentive 5th Grader.

- If you are unable to Express your ‘Understanding’ of These Concepts In this Manner,
Please Refrain from Offering Assistance here.

- - -
By What Mechanism does The Experimental Apparatus Originally Produce Two Photons ( or Electrons ( or x ) ) that The Experimenter Believes are ‘Entangled’ ?

By What Mechanism ...
( e.g. : Fully Describe The Process so That An Attentive 5th Grader 
could Recreate The Experiment if They had all The Requisite Materials )
… Could you Even Arrange this So that you could be reasonably sure that The Two Allegedly ‘Paired’ Atomic Particles would be Isolated, Routed and Then Measured, Excluding All Possibility of them Being Lost or Extraneous Particles Entering The Device and Becoming Confused with The Desired Particle(s.

It’s my understanding that when a Photon passes through any Physical Material;
Such as Air, Glass, A Mirror or Beam Splitter or Any Length of Optical Tubing; The Photon Interacts with Countless ( Literally Countless ) Electrons, Being Absorbed and Emitted in A Random Direction, Such that; Why would any Experimenter Believe that The Photon Reaching The Measuring Device, Would in Any way have any Relation to The Source Photon?

If The Experiment were Reproduced with ‘Classical’ Particles; Such as Billiard Balls, with Unambiguous & Consistent Properties from Their Creation Until Their Demise; 
How would such a Duplicate Experiment Differ from The Quantum Particle Experiment?

One Description that i was Reading a few days ago suggested that The Two Photons The are Allegedly ‘Entangled’, will each Express Some ‘Mirrored’ Property that when Eventually ‘Measured’. Such as ( x-Spin ), One being this way, and other being that way. ( ? )

First of all : What is Spin, And how is it Actually, Physically Measured?

Then: The ‘Problem’ ( The Source of The ‘Spooky Action at A Distance’ ) is That if you Measure The x-Spin ( or Polarity ) of Particle ( A ), The x-Spin of Particle ( B )will Always be The Opposite; Which Suggests Very Strongly That they Always had That Property for Each to Begin with,
But The Confusion seems to Develop from A Second Measurement of Particle ( B’s ) y-Spin, With The Question; How can The Particle ‘Know’ that you are now Measuring The y-Spin.
So what? ( ! )
The Result of The y-Spin Measurement is going to be Completely Unknown Anyway…?

Why do Physicists believe that Atomic Particles do NOT have Inherent Properties?
What is The Experiment that leads them to believe this?

Why is Heisenberg’s ‘Uncertainty’ Principle so Thoroughly & Completely Misunderstood !
It’s simply stating that if you shine a light on something, It’s going to get a tiny bit warmer, and determining what The objects original temperature was, or is, slightly confused.

Why would anyone derive from this that The Particles themselves are Confused?

i’m also very annoyed that while ‘Scientists’ routine disregard mountains of Actual Evidence presented by Thousands of Casual Observers and callously poo-poo such phenomena,
They Routinely make up all sorts of crazy things like String Theory, Dark Matter & Energy, Worm Holes & such; And Sell them As Absolute Scientific Facts, With Absolutely NO Evidence for Them at All.

It is Very Exasperating.
Science is A Religion. There is No Doubt to That.

The Most Simple & Obvious Evidence for this is that Every 50 years, or so,
Everything ( 98% ) that was Believed by ‘Scientists’ Then, is Thrown out and Replaced with New Nonsense.

Considering that there has been No Substantial Advancements in Any Understanding
( Make Believe or Observed ) of The Physical Universe for more than 50 years,
This time Scale may be slightly skewered.

10 years from Now;
People will consider Einstein The Same way we now Consider Freud.

Another thing that very much annoys me is E=MC^2.
Why would The Speed of Light be used as a Multiple here? ( !! ) !
And then Squared ( ! )
What !

If you just go through The ‘Supposed’ Atomic Process of What Uranium Atoms do during a A-Bomb Reaction; The Atoms Break Apart, New Atoms are Formed, Some Neutrons are Released, And Some Peripheral Particles are let loose.
Everything that was there at The Beginning of The Process,
Is Accounted for At The End of The Process.  
Which Matter was Converted to Energy?
Where did all The New Energy Come from?

It came from The Same Place that A Bowling Ball Hitting your Head when it Falls off a high Shelf. Everything has stored Energy in it. The Process by Which Uranium was Created tended to Store a LOT of Energy. When you Break it apart, That Energy is Released.

Is is possible to break apart Neutrons releasing their ‘Inherent’ Energy?
Yeah, Sure, Why not.

Is that Turning Matter into Energy?

Keep in mind as well that All These ‘Models’ of Atoms & Protons & Electrons & such,
Are Schematical Doodles that let Human Minds grab onto when we’re trying to understand how they interact.
These ‘Atoms’ that we describe are Not ‘Real Atoms’.

The Spoken Dao is Not The Eternal Dao. ( Lao Tzu )

The Schematical Atom is Not The Real Atom. ( Benie Einstein )

There is Tremendous Confusion Brought about when you use An Analogy or Simile to Understand some Unknown Phenomena.
There is a Incomprehensible Tendency of many otherwise bright people to believe that once you Start thinking of ( A ) to be Very much like ( B ), All The Attributes of ( A ) are represented in ( B ).

That is Crazy Talk.

One of The Craziest Bits of Crazy Talk is Thinking of Photons or Other Atomic Particles as ‘Waves’. The only kinds of ‘Waves’ that we’re Sensorily Familiar with, Are Water or Sound Waves, And they are Manifest in Two Distinct Mediums, The Volume that Envelopes A Congregate of Many, Many Tiny Particles & The Form of These Particles in Motion.
Photons & Electrons are Well Understood to be Singular Particles.
If they do Express Another Kind of ‘Very Mysterious’ Property or Effect,
It is very Confusing ( Prone to Create Confusion ) by labeling this other Property with An Effect that has no Relevant Corresponding Attributes.
This other Property has to be ( Needs to be ) Understood from Whole Cloth.

And until then; It should just be set aside.

The World is Full of Incomprehensible Things,
A True Epistemologist is Able to Just Set Things Aside for awhile;

While The Religious Scientists, Priests & Insecure Parents feel compelled to provide Authoritative Explanations for Things that they don’t even being to understand.

No comments: