You are choosing the words, but you are choosing based on all of your previous choices and experiences. — CasKev
2) Science says that events are non-deterministic. If they were we could throw out Schrodinger's equation and replace it with Newton's. But, alas, science decided 100 years ago that Newton's Laws do not correspond to experimental evidence including Bell's Inequality which demonstrate non-locality. — Rich
The key to understanding the Bohm solution is the quantum potential. There is a lot there so rather than actually studying it, people just copy errors. — Rich
1. The Schrodinger equation uniquely determines a system's quantum state at a future time — Andrew M
This is easily explained in local, deterministic terms. But can you (or anyone else) explain the result in terms of probabilities or non-determinism? — Andrew M
To be frank, I am still skeptical that many people, including physicists who should know better, are prone to this error. — Mr Bee
Quantum state??? And how does that figure into determinism? You mean that state that is spread out as a probabilistic wave function? — Rich
What you are omitting, conveniently is what happens when an additional slit is opened after the photon passes through the first slot. I've experiment doesn't make determinism. However, one experiment does destroy it. Determinism is all our nothing. — Rich
Are you figuring on proving that Quantum is deterministic and local in this thread? — Rich
They don't study Bohm, instead they just copy errors. Bell actually took the time to study the equations and came up with a way of understanding it better. Bell favored Bohm's approach. Of course others later on tested Bell's equation later in the laboratory.
As I have said in other thread, scientists are human and they are full of biases. Bohm should have received a Nobel Prize for doing the impossible, instead he was ostracized and marginalized - by everyone except Bell. — Rich
I count four deterministic interpretations. Bohm no. Many-Worlds, Many-Mind, still probabilistic in our world and universe. And the last one I never heard of. — Rich
I would like you to consider the silliness of Many-Minds. Observe to what extent scientists will the to deny choice in humans. It's bizarre. — Rich
The quantum state is analogous to the classical state in Newtonian Mechanics — Andrew M
You are using quantum states as if they are baseballs. — Rich
The only way to bring determinism back is in what Bell described as the "extravagant" Many-Worlds Interpretation, which still leaves us in a probabilistic world only now "we" have been also smeared over an infinite, every growing number of worlds. Everett's interpretation makes Copenhagen downright sensible. — Rich
Bohm's model would simply say that the quantum potential is at near certainty at the point of the slit. However, the quantity potential is subject to "information fluctuations", for example: the Delayed-Choice scenario. Note the use of choice. It is causal but not deterministic. — Rich
Someone would have to analyze and compute the quantum potential effects throughout the apparatus. I have not found a specific study on this problem. However, to revert to some deterministic, many-works interpretation based upon this one situation, given all of the other issues regarding quantum measurement problems, would be slightly "extravagant". — Rich
This paper discusses a way to analyze the experiment utilizing the concept of quantum erasing. No deterministic interpretation of quantum mechanics is required.
Single photon quantum erasing: a demonstration experiment
T L Dimitrova1 and A Weis — Rich
The MZI experiment is a simple and crystal-clear demonstration of quantum behavior without any stochastic elements. — Andrew M
Try to fly and see what happens. Try to make a choice and see what happens. — Rich
How can you know what choice you will make before you actually make it (hint: you can't). Once you've made a choice, how do you know that some component of hard free will could have allowed you to choose otherwise? (this differs from the compatibilist sense of having options and being un-coerced)... — VagabondSpectre
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.