The double solution theory, a new interpretation of Wave Mechanics

Here's an interesting little link.....
Besides re-enforcing the reality of time, and its part in all we can participate in with our Universe and GR, it also touches on quantum effects...




"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
https://medienportal.univie.ac.at/p...n-quantum-mechanics-meets-general-relativity/

According to general relativity, time flows differently at different positions due to the distortion of space-time by a nearby massive object. A single clock being in a superposition of two locations allows probing quantum interference effects in combination with general relativity. Image credits: Quantum Optics, Quantum Nanophysics, Quantum Information; University of Vienna.
The unification of quantum mechanics and Einstein's general relativity is one of the most exciting and still open questions in modern physics. General relativity, the joint theory of gravity, space and time gives predictions that become clearly evident on a cosmic scale of stars and galaxies. Quantum effects, on the other hand, are fragile and are typically observed on small scales, e.g. when considering single particles and atoms. That is why it is very hard to test the interplay between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Now theoretical physicists led by Časlav Brukner at the University of Vienna propose a novel experiment which can probe the overlap of the two theories. The focus of the work is to measure the general relativistic notion of time on a quantum scale. The findings will be published this week in "Nature Communications".
Time in general relativity
One of the counterintuitive predictions of Einstein's general relativity is that gravity distorts the flow of time. The theory predicts that clocks tick slower near a massive body and tick faster the further they are away from the mass. This effect results in a so-called "twin paradox": if one twin moves out to live at a higher altitude, he will age faster than the other twin who remains on the ground. This effect has been precisely verified in classical experiments, but not in conjunction with quantum effects, which is the aim of the newly proposed experiment.

Quantum interference and complementarity
The Viennese group of researchers wants to exploit the extraordinary possibility that a single quantum particle can lose the classical property of having a well-defined position, or as phrased in quantum mechanical terms: it can be in a "superposition". This allows for wave-like effects, called interference, with a single particle. However, if the position of the particle is measured, or even if it can in principle be known, this effect is lost. In other words, it is not possible to observe interference and simultaneously know the position of the particle. Such a connection between information and interference is an example of quantum complementarity - a principle proposed by Niels Bohr. The experimental proposal now published in “Nature Communications” combines this principle with the "twin paradox" of general relativity.

Einstein's "twin paradox" for a quantum "only child"
The team at the University of Vienna considers a single clock (any particle with evolving internal degrees of freedom such as spin) which is brought in a superposition of two locations – one closer and one further away from the surface of the Earth. According to general relativity, the clock ticks at different rates in the two locations, in the same way as the two twins would age differently. But since the time measured by the clock reveals the information on where the clock was located, the interference and the wave-nature of the clock is lost. "It is the twin paradox for a quantum ‘only child’, and it requires general relativity as well as quantum mechanics. Such an interplay between the two theories has never been probed in experiments yet" – says Magdalena Zych, the lead author of the paper and member of the Vienna Doctoral Program CoQuS. It is therefore the first proposal for an experiment that allows testing the genuine general relativistic notion of time in conjunction with quantum complementarity.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thanks for posting that experiment proposal. This is the paper discussing the experiment proposal.
General relativistic effects in quantum interference of photons
http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/29/22/224010

The PDF
http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/29/22/224010/pdf/0264-9381_29_22_224010.pdf

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ok, they finally removed cav755's bullcrap from Wikipedia. About frigging time.

"Done. I agree with DVdm, it is WP:SYNTH and WP:UNDUE. If someone wants to add back a few lines of appropriate and sourced content on whatever in that mess was relevant to the article, be my guest. --ChetvornoTALK 21:54, 8 April 2014 (UTC)"​

Who wants to place bets that he tries to put it back once again, and makes more user accounts to fight his little Wiki war?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes.

 

Are you able to understand the statistical nature of quantum mechanics does not fully explain the walking droplets?

From 2:10 in the video, "Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics"

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

"XII. Conclusion
Such is, in its main lines, the present state of the Wave mechanics interpretation by the double-solution theory, and its thermodynamical extension. I think that when this interpretation is further elaborated, extended, and eventually modified in some of its aspects, it will lead to a better understanding of the true coexistence of waves and particles about which actual Quantum mechanics only gives statistical information, often correct, but in my opinion incomplete."

The Copenhagen interpretation is statistical and incomplete.

 

Good job exposing the intellectually dishonest act. It leaves me wondering what he was trying to achieve? Maybe he thinks it would become a valid reference? LOL. I'm waiting for Dunning and Kruger to pop in and inform us the experiment is over.

 

As Lenin once said, "A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth."

Edit: Oh my god, I just checked the article and he's already put it back! What a douche!

 

Come on D&K. You must have enough data by now. This guy may represent a 'new' category: Stupidism-> the right to be stupid and to remain so indefinitely. I get it you have to give him more time to grow a brain.

 

cav755 does make a pretty damn good inductive argument via Youtube, I have to say. This is the only response I've seen so far which adequately addresses his concerns:

[video=youtube;4PDJcw9oJt0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PDJcw9oJt0[/video]​

 

"Walking droplets
Yves Couder and co-workers recently discovered a macroscopic pilot wave system in the form of walking droplets. This system exhibits behaviour of a pilot wave, heretofore considered to be reserved to microscopic phenomena.[58]
MIT researchers expand the range of quantum behaviors that can be replicated in fluidic systems, offering a new perspective on wave-particle duality.[59] "Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics[60] This physical picture is remakably similar to an early model of quantum dynamics proposed by Louis de Broglie..."[61]"

 

Are you able to understand the statistical nature of quantum mechanics does not fully explain the walking droplets?

From 2:10 in the video, "Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics"

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

"XII. Conclusion
Such is, in its main lines, the present state of the Wave mechanics interpretation by the double-solution theory, and its thermodynamical extension. I think that when this interpretation is further elaborated, extended, and eventually modified in some of its aspects, it will lead to a better understanding of the true coexistence of waves and particles about which actual Quantum mechanics only gives statistical information, often correct, but in my opinion incomplete."

The Copenhagen interpretation is statistical and incomplete.

 

That theme song [LOL] is good for stupism and dufusism. The right to be a dufus and to remain so indefinitely.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmC0ygr08tE

"Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics[60] This physical picture is remakably similar to an early model of quantum dynamics proposed by Louis de Broglie..."[61]"

 

No worries brucep.
One of the trolls has raised his head it seems [cav755] ....I'm just curious as to when the other one will show his face.

 

If only Reiku were here, no doubt he'd put cav755 in his place and save the galaxy.

 

Are you able to understand the statistical nature of quantum mechanics does not fully explain the walking droplets?

From 2:10 in the video, "Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics"

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

"XII. Conclusion
Such is, in its main lines, the present state of the Wave mechanics interpretation by the double-solution theory, and its thermodynamical extension. I think that when this interpretation is further elaborated, extended, and eventually modified in some of its aspects, it will lead to a better understanding of the true coexistence of waves and particles about which actual Quantum mechanics only gives statistical information, often correct, but in my opinion incomplete."

The Copenhagen interpretation is statistical and incomplete.

 

He appears to have actually made an effort, but wow, the epic fail!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmC0ygr08tE

"Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics. ... This physical picture is remakably similar to an early model of quantum dynamics proposed by Louis de Broglie..."

 

Wow. Ok, um, well, it is good to know what I'm dealing with here, thanks. I don't want to sound too condescending, but you aren't anywhere close. Bow shock is a sound wave in the interstellar medium. It is basically the same as the boundary between the rocket exhaust and the air for a rocket engine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow_shock

You also didn't say anything about the speed of the wave -- so please answer yes or no: does the wave travel at the same speed as the particle?

It almost looks like you picked a random picture of a cone shaped wave front and posted it -- but by your description, you meant that to be literal, not an analogy. It is so wrong it is tough to think there might even be a starting place for teaching you.

The reason it isn't believed by scientists to exist is that it has not been detected. But good to know you think it should have been detected by now.

I think you mean superfluid, but no, superfluids are not without drag. They are without viscosity, but viscosity is not the only cause of drag. Pressure is a source of drag on its own.

Blah, blah, blah. It was a yes or no question: please answer it yes or no: Do you believe the aether has a rest frame?

The quote, where it says "relativistic aether" implies a no answer, but doesn't say it explicitly: I want to hear you say it. Why? Because the other things you say imply you think it should have a rest frame. The bow shock has a rest frame, for example (the rest frame of the interstellar medium).

 

Three cheers for intellectual honesty!