View Single Post
  #4  
Old 10-27-2005, 04:25 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is there inherent, observable randomness in the universe?

[ QUOTE ]
The particle is there, only we can never know for sure, no matter how accurate our measuring devices become. The limitation applies to us and not the universe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm afraid you don't fully understand the results of the double slit experiment with single particles.

from http://www.space.com/searchforlife/q...y_041111.html:

"So light is both a particle and a wave. OK, kind of unexpected (like Jell-O) but perhaps not totally weird. But the double slit experiment had another trick up its sleeve. One could send one photon (or “quantum” of energy) through a single slit at a time, with a sufficiently long interval in between, and eventually a spot builds up that looks just like the one produced when a very intense (many photons) light was sent through the slit. But then a strange thing happened. When one sends a single photon at a time (waiting between each laser pulse, for example) toward the screen when both slits are open, rather than two spots eventually building up opposite the two slit openings, what eventually builds up is the interference pattern of alternating bright and dark lines! Hmm… how can this be, if only one photon was sent through the apparatus at a time?

The answer is that each individual photon must – in order to have produced an interference pattern -- have gone through both slits! This, the simplest of quantum weirdness experiments, has been the basis of many of the unintuitive interpretations of quantum physics. We can see, perhaps, how physicists might conclude, for example, that a particle of light is not a particle until it is measured at the screen. It turns out that the particle of light is rather a wave before it is measured. But it is not a wave in the ocean-wave sense. It is not a wave of matter but rather, it turns out that it is apparently a wave of probability. That is, the elementary particles making up the trees, people, and planets -- what we see around us -- are apparently just distributions of likelihood until they are measured (that is, measured or observed). So much for the Victorian view of solid matter!"

This uncertainty isn't really a limitation due to our ability to measure precisely, but instead, until measured, the particle is in effect ("physically") everywhere at once (distributed according to its probability function). There has been no neat explanation of how this can be, only quantification of the consequences. To explain this behavior in a manner that humans can understand will (I believe) require a fundamental breaking down of everything we think we "know" about matter and the universe, on a scale that surpasses even relativity in its "weirdness". Bottomline is the universe is far more "strange" than we can fully understand right now -- but we have the tools to quantify and predict its behavior on a probability basis! (This doesn't necessitate "randomness", either, however. It could be deterministic based on causes we cannot observe at this time, like vibrations in another dimension for example.)
Reply With Quote