[Philip Benjamin] https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-born-rule-has-been-derived-from-simple-physical-principles-20190213/ Schrödinger equation (1925) is a formal description of the French physicist Louis de Broglie’s (1924) wave-like—NOT WAVY-- behavior of quantum particles (electrons). It ascribes to a particle a wave function (ψ) from which the particle’s future behavior can be predicted. The wave function is a purely mathematical expression, not directly related to anything observed. Born’s bold pure intuition has no specific justification. Born unnecessarily conceived of a “wavy nature” of quantum particles into real “waves of probability”. That is unwarranted, because probabilities are not possibilities. The Schrödinger-de Broglie “Wave-Likeness” is just adequate. Born indeed considered it as basically a mathematical tool for calculating the probabilities—not realities-- of observing a particular outcome in an experiment. All the subsequent “imaginations” of a quantum world as “the reality” and sometimes as “ultimate reality” are pure fantasies and adult fairy tales—myths, mists, mindsets and mentalities. Absurdities are inherently associated with conceiving WAVE-LIKENESS into WAVINESS. Particles remain particles all the time. Even photons are corpuscles, most probably with mass at an indeterminate decimal place! Philip Benjamin
<https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-born-rule-has-been-derived-from-simple-physical-principles-20190213/> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Bruce Kellett Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 5:11 PM To: Everything List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Born's rule from almost nothing On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 9:00 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 1/29/2021 5:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: If you induce decoherence by measuring at the slits, then the interference pattern disappears -- you have certainly created a separate "world" for each path, but these can no longer interfere. That is part of the definition of the "worlds" that are created by irreversible decoherence. No problem. So the concept of "world" is, indeed, well-defined in physics. By giving a magic role to the observer, or its consciousness, or of measurement. The observer can no more be a machine in that picture. There's no magic or observer invoked. That's the function of decoherence, which operates independent of observers or deliberate measurement. Exactly. It might not be defined in logic or metaphysics, but this is of no concern to the working physicist -- we know perfectly well what we mean by "a world”. FAPP. OK. The goal here is to try to understand what happens. And we can readily tell when someone is talking nonsense by claiming that "worlds interfere statistically without interacting”. ? (That is rather standard, and pretty obvious, I would say). Really? I've never heard of it and it seems pretty obviously nonsense to me. Yes. Bruno has a fine line in nonsensical sayings that he trots out on random occasions when he does not have a real argument. . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/SA0PR11MB4704E8A9547CC035049C5014A8B89%40SA0PR11MB4704.namprd11.prod.outlook.com.
