Jump to content
Science Forums

Getting The Jump On The Quantum Jump


Recommended Posts

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.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190603124621.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news%2Ftop_science+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+Science+News%29

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190603124621.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news%2Ftop_science+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+Science+News%29

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
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190603124621.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news%2Ftop_science+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+Science+News%29

 

 

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...