Quantum Theory

A few years ago one of my nieces, then aged twelve, asked me what "the opposite of superposition" is. Her question completely stumped me at the time. It still does. I have since considered placeholder answers like: normal position, position, classical position, etc. None of them seem satisfactory, however. This same question (with full quotation marks) also continues to stump Google. NB. I am prepared to be told that the question is nonsensical - that it'll be like asking what the opposite of Spain is, for example. Still, I'm up for it.

I’m about 99.999% sure that many worlds isn’t true. However, if many worlds seriously is true, isn’t quantum immortality an inevitably? Wouldn’t you always have to perceive yourself as being in a world where you survive the most ridiculously unlikely of events? For hundreds or even thousands of years? There’s no scientific law that you have to die. It’s just that, in a single universe paradigm, the odds will catch up to you after no more than 120 years with about 99.99999% certainty. However, if there are infinitely many universes, wouldn’t there have to be some universe out there where the Buddha is still alive? And wouldn’t that have to be the universe…

The 1D transverse field Ising model is usually solved in quantum way, but we can also solve it classically - parametrize angles of spins and use Boltzmann ensemble of sequences of spin angles: Pr(σ)∝exp(−H(σ)) for σ=((cos(αi),sin(αi)))i∈Z getting Markov process of angles, which can be easily approximated with Maximal Entropy Random Walk, for example getting below joint distributions for (αi, αi+1) for various parameters (Section III here ) : As intuition suggests, there is some thermal wobbling of spin directions: (anti)aligned for dominating J, in x axis for dominating h. However, in quantum approaches there are only considered …

Hello I know that its fairly accurate value is 8.73 * 10122 when we are in the order of magnitude of 10120. But I also know that there is a value in the order of magnitude of 1060 I would like to know a value with a few decimal places and the exact exponent for the order of magnitude of 1060. Thanks for your answers

Hey there! I have two questions regarding the Double Slit Experiment and the Wave Function Collapse. How effective does a measuring device have to be to cause a collapse? As in, say that every second the device has a 50% chance to turn off or on for one second, does the collapse still occur when the device has shutoff? Similarly, suppose an observer has been awake for a few days and perhaps even on a drug trip that is rendering them in and out of consciousness, is there a threshold in which the observation does not occur? Thank you for your time! <3 Phillip.

At school, we were teached that you can understand Heisenberg's uncertainty principle by considering the measurement event: To measure the particle, you have to interact with it, and this is typically done by throwing a photon to it. Even a single photon will give some momentum to the particle, and thus, the state of the particle is not same anymore, and thus, you can never measure it exactly. I have become to question this explanation. Let us think in purely classical terms. We have a target particle with disposition x (a 3d vector) and velocity v (also a 3d vector). So, we have six unknowns. We poke it with a photon whose disposition changes by dx (a 3d vector…

Well from what I understand quantum computers operate on 0s and 1s and both and being both at the same time. So this opens up big problem how could data be both there and not there? From what I understand computers today use 1s and 0s , but quantum computers use 1s, 0s and can be both 1 and 0 at the same time? So how can data be both 1 and 0 at the same time so data is there and not there?

I have seen some pictures when I was in school where they used coloured balls to represent sub atomic particles. I have also seen on Wikipedia the probability clouds of where a particle may most likely be but that doesn't tell you really what a particle looks like. So what does it actually look like? How do I start thinking of a subatomic particle in my head?

How would 2 quantum-entangled particles interact with each other if one of them was placed in a gravitational field strong enough to distort time for that particle with a considerable deviation? Would there be any lag? If so, doesn't that contradict quantum entanglement?

I've read some works of Emilio del giudice about coherence domains in water. However I saw this interesting article on Brownian Collisions which make the formation of these coherence domains something quite hard to possibly exist..... Here is the article:- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328024287_Limits_on_Quantum_Coherent_Domains_in_Liquid_Water Also here are two more articles on coherence domains in water;- https://m.scirp.org/papers/90862 (umm click download pdf cuz scirp articles on the site are presented in a very hard to read manner) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333531765_Deep_into_the_Water_Exploring_the_Hydro-El…

What force should be bigger: necessary force for change of polarization of red photon or necessary force for change of polarization of blue photon?

So, it's terribly obvious to me that a, say, 45 degree angle between the two orthogonal ones is going to let you get more light through, the same applying to all polarized waves. Which is why the inequality is violated often, as a non-90 degree angle changes the polarization. What is less obvious to me is what happens if you have a fourth direction of measurement, say again, at 45 degrees to the two orthogonal ones, but which is also orthogonal to the third, and no measurement is taken on a shared direction? What I mean is a second pair of orthogonal directions at an arbitrary angle to the "original" pair, say z & x & q & w, and just as it is pointless …

Théorie Universelle Louis Giordano theorie de l'unviers.pdf

If the black holes in LQG are what the quantum theory suggests how do we account for the entropy of the particles on there way into the back hole how can so many mistakes in the form of entropy lead to a fully functioning portal to another universe how does this work under the laws of current particle physics?

No math, no theories simple question..

Do Vertual Particles "Only" Superimpose? And how likely could this idea be modeled in a "Macro" Phiscal Reality "General Relativity" example, and serve as some use in our modern understanding of nature's realms?

I think this is an interesting thought experiment. It's a variation of the Wigner's friend experiment which could go down as one of the most important thought experiments in science. There's been a lot of papers on Wigner's friend lately. I think it supports the consciousness or awareness of the observer in QM is needed to fully explain quantum mechanics. https://hwimberlyjr.medium.com/can-wigners-friend-lie-c3fabeaa7bbc This would be an interesting experiment. If Wigner's friend calls and tells Wigner the truth about what was measured and the Wigner can't carry out an interference measurement, then the friend calls him and lies about the measurement and W…

Hi, Planck while explaining the black-body radiation postulated that photon energy is quantised, that is, E=hf, f is frequency. Similarly to explain the matter waves, de Brogile proposed that p=h/y, y is wavelength. Using this two relations, the whole theory of QM has been developed. Is there any derivation of these results ? Or are they accepted to be fundamental relations of nature? Thanks !

Hope the question makes sense as I am only just (well, hopefully) beginning to get the beginnings of a feel for the subject. Some objects in QFT have mass (protons,I am thinking ) so do they cause curvature and does this affect any calculations? Would /could EM fields be intrinsically (or extrinsically?) curved?

Has it really been shown that probability laws would work under MWI? Anything that can theoretically happen under the laws of physics would seemingly have a probability of infinity/infinity of happening under MWI.

Hi everyone, While reading Quantum Mechanics from Griffiths, I came upon a point where the author writes that the relationship between spin of a particle and its characteristic statistical behavior is explained by relativity. I'm in complete darkness regarding this. Can someone please explain how this is explained? And also it will be great if someone can cite some source or mathematically explain the phenomenon. Thanks in advance!

What exactly is the difference between the 2?

Is Infinty Descrete? How can something be descrete when it is infinite?

We know that thanks to the tunnel effect, in the case of a finite potential step and considering a stationary state, when a plane wave encounter the step the probabability that the wave-particle coming from -∞ (where potential is V=0) will be ≠ 0, in particular the wave function will be exponential decay. We can also calculate the probability flux (J) through the potential step and the result is J=0. In my book i read that taking into account all these results, the interpretation that we can give is that considering many particles, a certain percentage will cross the step and after a definite amount of time it will turns back before setting out in the direction where it c…

Hi guys! Back after a lot of days ! :) So I was studying quantum mechanics and gor interested to find out the derivation of uncertainty principle. In the course of doing this, I found there were two kinds of derivations. One is relating the uncertainty principle as a basic fundamental property of Fourier transform and deriving it from Fourier transform. The other one uses operators and derives the relation by exploiting the non-commutavity of two operators. My question is since the two derivations yield the same result, there must be some deep subtle connection between the two, or, between Fourier transformation and non-commutative operat…