We know Quantum Mechanics works, but does it work because Uncertainty is the way to go, or are we missing ...?

Question

... a deeper underlying theory (that might further explain WHY it works)?

Answer 1

I've heard a lot of debate regarding this issue. The EPR paradox (a thought experiment put forth by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) was meant to illustrate that quantum mechanics was incomplete and that there must be some deeper theory that it is just a part of. A fellow by the name of Bell came up with a famous equation (cleverly called Bell's inequality) that ultimately predicts that if quantum mechanics is part of some deeper theory, then that theory must be non-local. In physics, locality is the idea that you can describe parts nature without referencing all the other junk in the universe. For example, I can talk about the physics of a pool game without needing to take into account the gravitational efffects on the pool balls of some planet in the Andromeda galaxy. Most physicists dislike the idea of non-local theories and figure that if you can't have a deeper theory that is local, there is no point in trying to develope one. Personally, I think that the theory that finally blends relativity and quantum mechanics into a consistant framework will be non-local. In fact, as a physicist I'm now working on developing that theory.

Answer 2

FYI: Einstein in his initial days after publishing the theory of relativity, said once that "I do not understand Quantum Mechanics". But whether he continued to maintain this all through out his life and career, I do not know.

There are guys who argue that "Uncertainty principle" itself is an absolutely wrong theory. But that is what have been accepted. We know not yet really are we really at the end of it. If so then let us assume QM and Relativity would never meet. That is exactly the problem and you ask it as a question. How inquisitive you are?

Some one has asked this question long before and no answer is found yet.

Answer 3

There has to be a deeper, better theory, especially since General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible, either that or one of the two theories is completely wrong even though it may appear to work.

Answer 4

What you're observing for does no longer exist. there is not any line in the sand that demarcates the placement one stops and the different starts. After a various factor, QM in basic terms does not furnish the superb effects (or, a minimum of we can't calculate them sturdy satisfactory). the comparable is going for classical physics (which in basic terms does no longer remember the forces that are obtrusive on a quantum scale). the astounding respond i provides you is the bullet analogy. If what you're observing at can extremely regarded at as though it have been a projectile (i.E. Proton, automobile, Mars, etc.) and the action is persevering with with that remark, then you might desire to be able to use classical physics. If what you're observing at can't be, like a quark or while you're conversing approximately tunneling or entanglement (that are innovations and can by ability of no ability be fired out of something), then QM will might want for use. that could be a murky self-discipline. are not getting too caught up with which technique to apply. if youin case you fully grasp the concepts, then you relatively would be waiting to be superb.

Answer 5

Everyone who has ever thought about it has asked that question. No one has yet answered it. Quantum physics is still being studied. Quantum gravity, if it works out, may give some insight. The vast majority of scientific effort toward this is in string theory and M-brane theory. If any of that work succeeds, it may give insight to the question.

Answer 6

Microlink has the only educated answer so far. You aren't the only person to take this stance, it's referred to as a "hidden variable theory" in QM---they notion that there exist underlying principles that we process through QM in some kind of average way. David Bohm is the only person I know who has done substantial historical work in this area, maybe microlink knows some more references.

Answer 7

Quantum Mechanics works because we think it does and do not have any better explanation for what we observe.

Much like Alchemy giving way to Science - this is quite similar. It is the delineation between the known and the unknown

Answer 8

Just a laymen's interest but from my limited understanding... hat's off to Microlinks clear response. My understanding of Bell's theorm suggests that something has to give: if not locality than logic itself! I read somewhere that John Sipe is following up on some aspects of Bohm's work..?

Answer 9

Quantum mechanics works because it does. In order to find out exactly how it works we must accept it and forget about trying to figure it out.
It is a concept that we have absolutly no business meddling in. It is a far too powerful force and cannot be controlled by man-or woman.

Answer 10

Unfortunately, my answer is a direct quote from Forrest Gump.

"... I think that maybe its both..."