Skip to main content

Quantum mechanics



      I was reading "Essentials of Statistical Thermodynamics" by Nash today. Several things that he said made me realize a lot of truths about Stat ThermoDyn. He starts by saying that thermodynamics teaches us what happens and how much of it happens, but it does not tell us why it happens. Most such textbooks would probably say the same thing, and then proceed to drown us in jargon and all manner of equations. My favorite part is when these oh-so-smart guys shove my ignorance in my face by sating things like "It is trivial to extrapolate from this 3 term equation to a 30 term equation". And I am left wondering what the hell happened. Needless to say, from that point onwards I am too annoyed to make sense of anything. So Nash takes us through the subject with minimal assumptions and the Boltzmann distribution almost seems like a natural extension of basic probability which actually it is. So, reading his book got me thinking about a lot of other things and I ended up with my interpretation of the interpretations of Quantum mechanics. Physicists beware! This might induce a strong fit of laughter so read it while firmly placed on a chair or better still sit on the ground.

      The system we will consider is a coin toss. Heads is one quantum state and tails is another.

      Copenhagen Interpretation : The coin is flipped into a bottomless pit. A platform is extended by the user at a random point into the pit. So depending on when and how the platform was extended, we will see one of either heads or tails. Until that point, the coin is in an indeterminate state.

     Many worlds interpretation : The coin is flipped and it falls to the ground. At that instant two universes are created one in which the coin lands on heads and the other in which it lands as tails. Needless to say this is stupid.

      Bohmian interpretation : Coin is flipped and it falls to the ground. Owing to our ignorance about the air density and gravitation of the room etc, we cannot determine exactly whether it will be heads or tails. But, the important thing is, if we knew all these hidden variables, we can determine heads or tails deterministically.

     Von Neumann interpretation : Coin is flipped and the flipper watches it fall down. Depending on the flipper's choice made in hi/her mind, the coin will either appear as heads or tails !!

     Those are the ones I am aware of. This leads me to another problem that has puzzled me since my school days. We make so many assumptions in deriving equations w.r.t any measurement. For example, Stirling's approximation is used heavily in any derivation of Boltzmann statistics. Then, the terms cancel out and get modified etc. What if we measure these values the correct way ? Would the laws still be valid ? I am sure they would be, but I have this nagging doubt about the whole thing. The closest someone comes to explain it is Resnick and Halliday's Physics textbook. While discussing gravitation, in a boxed feature, he examines how we know the exponent is 2.0 in the denominator of the gravitational law. And suggests that experiments suggest it is 2.0 +/- some 10-6 or something which is within experimental error. So based on this, I will explain Krishnadev interpretation.

      Krishnadev interpretation : Coin is flipped with a certain force. Due to inaccuracies in theories dealing with the entire universe, it gives a net random error in calculation of the said force, its effect on the coin, the coin's efect on the surroundings and etc etc which makes the outcome appear random. Believe me, it is not actually random !!!

Comments

Smita said…
one of the best till now....
LOL

Keep them coming
August 22, 2011 at 4:25:00 PM GMT+5:30
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Shawshank Redemption

      I submitted my thesis today, and strangely I feel sad. I do not feel happy or even relieved. When I started my PhD, I thought by the end of it, I will feel like Norgay or Hillary and be on top of the world. I thought it would be a great success, and something never attempted before. But alas, all I feel is what Andy Dufresne might have felt like after escaping the Shawshank prison. My whole PhD has been nothing but a prison for my scientific spirit, incarcerated for all the wrong reasons. The writing of the thesis has been nothing less than Andy's escape from prison, crawling through 200 metres of sewerage. At the end of itall I feel is, "Well... I am free, now I have to bathe and cleanse my system to start afresh". Those are my thoughts exactly. At this end of the PhD, I feel like a fool undergoing all the stupidity and mediocrity. What meaning is left in PhD, I wonder.       I am sick and tired of it, and I do hope the damn thing gets accepted. Well, even if it i...
3 comments
Read more

Alien Invasion

      I was watching another alien invasion movie today. And I feel that this whole Martians/venusians or Alpha centaurians are vulnerable is a big problem with the whole genre. I believe that no civilization can really discover space travel without first discovering the secrets of health and disease. And if they have discovered that, then it is only a matter of time before they realize that they dont need huge machines and energy expensive robots and exoskeletons etc. All that they will do is send an earth-rover initially equipped with a small biological specimen collector/analyzer and find out the genetic makeup of earthlings. Once they do that, they will obviously realize that humans are susceptible to a lot of diseases. They dont need to understand english, they dont need to communicate with us (who the hell except us wants to anyway ?). It is our (rather Hollywood's) stupidity to think that Aliens would come to Earth and stand before us and in a comma...
2 comments
Read more

Theory of Love

      This post has also been a long time in coming. I firmly reject the stupid notion that our emotions are anything other than chemical reactions occurring in the brain. So having all the hocus pocus of 'souls' and spirits etc out of the way, we can concentrate on the chemistry of neural activity. And when speaking of emotions, what better emotion than the most exalted and mysterious of these, 'love'. What the hell is it, by the way ? Hmm, its like being punched by the invisible man, you can feel it, but you cannot explain or predict it.      The 'punch in the face by invisible man' hypothesis of love is very apt for a discussion of the neurochemistry of love. Because every emotion has to have a sensory input, and no emotion can exist in vacuum. So, the real question we must ask ourselves is this : "What is the mechanism of formation of 'love'-like emotions in the brain ?". Is it different for 'love' of a laddoo for e...
2 comments
Read more