RE: [asa] The cat

I am not sure about the statement that 'things are not "real" until
observed.' We may not know in what particular state, say in a hydrogen
atom, the electron is, but we surely know that there is an atom and an
electron in the system that we are dealing with.

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Carol or John Burgeson
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:04 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] The cat

The question came up -- why would I name the cat in the poem "Aspect?"
I shall try to explain.

The expression "quantum mechanics" was first used by Max Born in a 1924
article in which he discussed "the formal passage from classical
mechanics to a quantum mechanics." Albert Einstein later said about it:
"Quantum mechanics is very impressive. But an inner voice tells me that
it is not yet the real thing. The theory produces a good deal but hardly
brings us closer to the secret of the Old One. I am at all events
convinced that He does not play dice." Quoted in SEDUCED BY SCIENCE, HOW
AMERICAN RELIGION HAS LOST ITS WAY, by Steven Goldberg, 1999. Page 124.

The "Copenhagen Interpretation," which claims that, in essence, things
are not "real" until observed, was developed by Neils Bohr in the late
1920s and was given fame by Erwin Schroedinger in 1935 with his "cat"
gedanken experiment. It is still a valid model today, although other
models are in contention. A recent (1986) book, THE GHOST IN THE ATOM,
by Paul Davies, allows eight different physicists, each with a different
model, to argue their cases.

In the Physical Review for May, 1935, Einstein, Poldosky and Rosen
published their famous "EPR" paper, a copy of which may be accessed at
www.burgy.50megs.com/epr.htm

In this paper, it is argued that QM cannot possibly be "true" because if
it is then "locality" is necessarily violated, and this is absurd. The
issue continued with Bell, Wheeler, Von Neuman and others giving
insights (but not settling the issue) over the next half century. Then a
French physicist, Alan Aspect, in the 1980s, demonstrated that
"locality" is, indeed, falsified. This does not, of course, "prove" that
QM is "true," only that the EPR argument fails. The Copenhagen
interpretation (and the famous cat) remains a live option.

For more on this subject, read SCHROEDINGER'S KITTENS, by John Gribbin.
A review (not mine) of the book is at

http://www.cix.co.uk/~acampbell/bookreviews/r/gribbin-1.html

and I have eight magnificent pages of the book on my website at

www.burgy.50megs.com/gribbin.htm

On this web page are the cover page, preface and pages 117-120 which
describe the Aspect experiment clearly as well as an even more exciting
follow-on experiment by Mizobuchi & Ohtake in Japan. In this last
experiment, a single particle is shown clearly to have both a particle
and a wave characteristic, starting as a particle, changing to a wave,
then back to a particle as it makes its way through the apparatus.

From page 158 of Gribbin's book:

"If the Bell inequality is violated (which it is) then local reality
must be abandoned even if quantum mechanics is completely wrong. The
result of the Aspect experiment shows that the Universe is not 'local
and real', whatever kind of scientific description you might dream up to
describe how it works."

So I have named the cat of the poem "Aspect," to honor a great
physicist, not as well known as he ought to be.

Burgy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:34:40 -0400