They don't say that what you see isn't there. It's there. They're just saying that the phenomena you observe are the product of more complex underlying phenomena. As for strings, there isn't a bit of evidence for that theory, so I wouldn't get too wrapped up in it.
2007-05-25 09:42:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with the first answer...my head hurts, but for a different reason. I do not understand your question even though I've taken quantum mechanics in advanced physics courses. Here's why:
Point 1: "what we see" makes no sense re QM because the quanta addressed by QM are way too small to see. Strings, for example, are one Plank length (about 10^-33 cm). They are so small that if the cuticle on your thumb were expanded to the size of the known universe, a string would be the size of that cuticle before the expansion.
Point 2: The quanta are there (wherever "there" is), but they are distributed over time and space to form probability distributions. For example, electrons around the core of an atom jitter around the nucleus to form clouds having their thickest (most probable) parts represent the electron orbits we've come to love in the Bohr Model. The electrons are certainly there...there somewhere in that probability cloud.
It is a mistake to say "external reality" does not exist simply because reality cannot be seen. In QM, reality can certainly be measured and with remarkable precision.
Point 3: What we see is always about what the mind perceives; so that aspect is not limited to QM stuff. Scientific observation is always based on perception and perception can be fooled. For years, we perceived that force was a change in momentum over time and thought that meant dp/dt = m0dv/dt = m0a; where f is force, m0 is rest mass, dv/dt is change in velocity, and a is acceleration = dv/dt.
But along came Einstein and we find that rest mass doesn't rest when v approaches light speed. In fact force now becomes F = dp/dt = mdv/dt + dm/dt v = m0a + dm/dt v which because of the dm/dt v term makes F > f = m0a. That is relativistic force (F) is greater than non relativistic force (f)because mass also changes in relativistic force.
Point 4: You err when talking about "low vibrations" for string energy. In fact, strings have extremely high vibrations and, therefore, extremely high energy levels. The reason these high energies do not manifest in our four dimensional world is because some portion of each string rests in higher dimensions outside our universe. Also, the energies (vibrations) cancel out so most of that string energy does not go beyond that one Plank length. [See source.]
2007-05-25 17:22:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by oldprof 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I haven't heard what you're talking about before, but quantum mechanics has a lot of stuff involving probability. An example is that there is a small chance that you'll fall through a table if you lean on it, but it's so small it never happens. The same principle says that you'll never know what's inside a box unless it's open and you're looking in it. Even when you close it back up, the thing inside could change shape.
"Generally, quantum mechanics does not assign definite values to observables. Instead, it makes predictions about probability distributions; that is, the probability of obtaining each of the possible outcomes from measuring an observable." Hope that helps.
2007-05-25 16:43:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nohc 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
1) IF string theory is correct, and it's looking like a big if right now, then everything is made up of strings on the most fundemental level - but still made up of atom and elements at 'larger' levels.
2) I don't know what you mean by everything being in our minds. Unless you have a mental disorder, yes, you see what is there.
3) Yes, reality exists. We know this because when we test it, everyone gets the same result.
2007-05-25 18:16:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by eri 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Quantum physics seems to lead to metaphysical speculations. The uncertainty principle was a logical outcome of simple event. When we "look" at something in a microscope with light, we send light waves out. The items that we see are too large to be noticably affected by these waves. However, as we "look" at smaller objects, we use more powerful energy waves. At some point the energy affects what we want to look at so it can't "stand still".
2007-05-25 16:45:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by cattbarf 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
When you say they you are referring to string theorists. That is a theory that has recently resurfaced but isn't widely accepted by any means.
Its a pretty easy subject to google but be prepared to read a lot if you want to try and grasp it.
2007-05-25 16:50:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ahhh!! my head hurts cuz i wuz thinkin of an answer=( my brain will nvr work properly again. Thnx a lot
2007-05-25 16:38:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by evilknieval 2
·
0⤊
1⤋