Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Getting The Jump On The Quantum Jump


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1042 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 06:09 AM

Schroeddingr's cat is saved.  Physicists have figured out how to predict the unpredictability of the quantum jump, how to catch it and, if necessary, reverse it to avoid danger - all in real time.

 

https://www.scienced...p Science News)

 



#2 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2717 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 09:05 AM

Schroeddingr's cat is saved.  Physicists have figured out how to predict the unpredictability of the quantum jump, how to catch it and, if necessary, reverse it to avoid danger - all in real time.

 

https://www.scienced...p Science News)

This article is practically meaningless. The reporter has confused the popular idea of the "quantum jump" between orbits or states - which became obsolete the moment science abandoned the 1913 vintage Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom in favour of quantum mechanics (Schrödinger 1926) - with the concept of measurement or interaction collapsing a wave function. It is the latter that relates to the Schrödinger's Cat Paradox, while the reported research seems to relate to the former. 

 

Frankly I am not much the wiser as to what has been done here, save that, from the abstract of the Nature paper it seems to give some sort of early warning of an imminent quantum transition between states. These are not treated as discontinuous jumps in QM anyway. One state evolves into the other under the perturbation of the electric vector (usually) of the radiation being absorbed. So it may be that somehow the start of the process can communicate itself to the experimenter before the result is apparent. 


Edited by exchemist, 04 June 2019 - 09:05 AM.


#3 Dubbelosix

Dubbelosix

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2975 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 10:29 AM

Schroeddingr's cat is saved.  Physicists have figured out how to predict the unpredictability of the quantum jump, how to catch it and, if necessary, reverse it to avoid danger - all in real time.

 

https://www.scienced...p Science News)

 

 

Fascinating, because if true, this means my assertions about quantum physics was spot on - there are mechanical and deterministic origins even at the quantum scales. It's not about randomness or unpredictability and certainly not pure statistics. 



#4 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1042 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 10:59 AM

This article is practically meaningless. The reporter has confused the popular idea of the "quantum jump" between orbits or states - which became obsolete the moment science abandoned the 1913 vintage Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom in favour of quantum mechanics (Schrödinger 1926) - with the concept of measurement or interaction collapsing a wave function. It is the latter that relates to the Schrödinger's Cat Paradox, while the reported research seems to relate to the former. 

 

Frankly I am not much the wiser as to what has been done here, save that, from the abstract of the Nature paper it seems to give some sort of early warning of an imminent quantum transition between states. These are not treated as discontinuous jumps in QM anyway. One state evolves into the other under the perturbation of the electric vector (usually) of the radiation being absorbed. So it may be that somehow the start of the process can communicate itself to the experimenter before the result is apparent. 

This non--physicist would not dare argue the point.  You know more than I.  Will just say that what I got out of it is  in your last line.  My reaction was that they'd have to be very fast.  Good if it works, though.



#5 Dubbelosix

Dubbelosix

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2975 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 12:49 PM

Exchemist has made many mistakes when it comes to physics and it took a while until it finally penetrated his head. He was wrong on a very serious account once saying systems exist at absolute zero - I told him, being a pure chemist by nature, only a chemist could make such erroneous statements. Needless to say, he has calmed down quite a bit with me...



#6 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2717 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 02:45 PM

This non--physicist would not dare argue the point.  You know more than I.  Will just say that what I got out of it is  in your last line.  My reaction was that they'd have to be very fast.  Good if it works, though.

You are certainly right about that: it is a very quick process.