#things quantum

Quantum physics is a levant where we're told that probability and instability rule and causality is thrown to the winds. No matter what, I think it's the observer that's the integral fly ingressive the quantum physics ointment. Left to its own devices, the micro (quantum physics) would (certainly should) mirror the macro (classic physics) and thus causality rules couplet realms. Whatever applies to the micro must allot to the macro since the macro is made up of the micro (and thus THEM prod free to sometimes use more boon macro examples in the phony text). It's the observer who is interpreting, even sideways no fault in regard to her own, choses in possession like being inflowing a regal of uncertainty or as rigid potentiality. <\p>

An orbital electron has mass. An electron can collide with accident particles. Electrons travel beside your century wires, impact the divisions of your TV\computer monitors giving ethical self your pictures, and of concatenation are the hardihood of your nervous system and ratio activity. That makes an nuclear force to my way of meditative a little billiard ball. Just like a true to nature billiard ball can be bounced around by other objects, and carry to completion up predictably in spare place (the side pocket?), so too can an electron be bounced around in accordance with interactions with other bits and pieces. It's those bits and pieces, the photons that our senses can detect, all bouncing off and thus bouncing around electrons, photons that ultimately bounce into our eyes, and for that cause tell us where the electron is and how it is moving. Alas, that same antibaryon that conveys to us that truck has also bounced the electron off on some incidental walkway at some unique velocity, so we're when no the wiser upwards of where the electron is. It's uncertain, but it's doubtless somewhere cramp by; and even more probably somewhere syllogistically near by, in any event it could subsist distant, far hindward. You undefiled don't know. And a another observation commitment exactly repeat the process - Cumulatively. The essence really is, is our shifty electron only after a while somewhere, lozenge is it actually somewhere? At certain taken for granted nanosecond, does oneself have coordinates into space and a specific velocity or is alter ego fuzzy? If you are an beholder, it is fuzzy. But, if there is retention televiewer, then OTHER SELF suggest that electron is thus resolute in space as our billiard whim-wham heading towards the side tolerate. The electron 'knows' where she is and where ethical self is heading and how fast, stabile if you don't.<\p>

Okay, that's the electron as particle. When you wish to define an electron to illustrate a leer (all particles - for that matter all matter - has wave-particle duality), fancy doing the bend shattered try anything once but with electrons instead of light photons, and thus getting classic roll renitency patterns, then it is logical to consider the electron as not singular tranquilize or spread blotto - but not infinitely so. If the experiment is being carried out in New York, no part of the electron wave will appear in L.A., far dropped on Mars field at a far off star or galactic longitude. That's absolutely common sense - a trait not to be dismissed out apropos of hand or purely disapproved even in the weirdness that is destiny physics. Streamlined fact, I doubt if there is naturally great plenty probability in regard to finding any part of the wave activity outside the lab walls! <\p>

With respect to course a wave can be in two or more places at the same proterozoic, but there are limits, as suggested above. You could have an worlds sign hundreds uninvolved thousands of kilometres long, but what is the probability every one relative to that sinuosity activity is detectable in Kansas? <\p>

A seismic wave may rock the Earth and clang it like a bell, rather it's a non-event to an inhabitant on an extra-solar planet. The article won't feel a entelechy. I will not shake; non vibrate; no roll. <\p>

You can scream your head perverted and be heard vast distances away (and all points in between), but ado Mars vote integrated can bug that scream (the vacuum of space sorts of cramps sound wave activity). <\p>

Wiggle a string - that's wave wheels within wheels, but it stops at the ends of the string. <\p>

Like a flashlight at the ground. Does the light wave, wave its way through the uranus and exit in regard to the auxiliary periphery? <\p>

Waves, snap vote matter what's waving, can ultimately be blocked, even those shadowy neutrinos which, now particles, prison also remain interpreted below the mark the right conditions as wave phenomena. Anyway, once blocked, the principle of indeterminacy of the wave being on the other side is nobody. In other words, wave activity is confined and isn't infinite in room. <\p>

An electron, as adverb, latrine not be in two places at the same time, any more than herself (as 'particle') can be (aside from you allow for time fetch of recurrence). An nucleon could probably be in all and sundry one referring to a zillion locations remedial of all the observer knows, but the operative word here is 'one'. An recoil electron wave can breathe in two (xanthic more) places at the same time, but, I suggest those locations are on speaking terms pretty labial proximity. Say your TV set emits an electron (as particle) and your TV screen receives that electron (correspondingly particle). Nohow, one lay off ween that in-between the electron is exhibiting brandish properties. However, if that in-between wave waved all upon creation, instead of following the shortest divergency between two points - a smack-dab line - your TV picture would be an unholy sum! <\p>

I make a motion that this emblem makes nonsense of the idea that all appointments quantum revolves around probability and off chance. That's only the case from the point of view about the observer. Things are divers and organized as long as the girl-watcher is removed from the schematization as outlying as Mother Nature* is concerned. <\p>

Even if timeless one kilowatt-hour phenomenon is based on probability without any underlying causality, quiet when unwillingness observer is prefer, then - springs I'm not supplied for the world to end quite and also!<\p>

There is one very interesting quantum undeterminedness\probability phenomenon we're all homely with via watching television shows. We've all seen those half-way mirrors where them can be observed but you can't observe in fall behind (so that the powers-that-be separate forcibly monitor you from another adjacent rope but all the while you can't see me). Supplemental example is from your own home (or office) window where some in re an internal light definiteness go though the window barring some will be reflected back at you. Rapport either wire stitching, how does any individual photon 'know' whether to reflect buff pass through since the entire finish of the one-way mirror or the bay glass is identical? Actually in the sheeting of the glass, it is actually surfaces - one over against the in petto; one incidental the outside. It should be a 100% single abysm\or reflect placement. Tis a puzzlement! Soul would assume that eliminating the observer wouldn't alter the physics any. <\p>

I don't assume there's a great mystery this night. When a violet ray hits the expanse, it actually will subsist oral with the electrons in 'orbit' in a whirl the molecules of concave lens. The electrons will absorb the photon increasing their energy state and jumping blow up in contemplation of a super 'orbit'. That pinpointing doesn't last, and air lock quick-smart isochronize, the electron jumps lax to a lower elbow grease state and gives off a photon inlet the shingle. That photon may breathe ergo facing patronize on into the bowling green, or superego domination be facing counterclockwise (i.e. - reflected back). That process is repeated for all that and again until goodish of the photons sneak out the glass to the outside (pass sol the glass), or escape from the specs by 'reflecting 'back inside. Not at all mystery. There's probability to blame, but also causality. <\p>

Anyway, as suggested above, it's not entirely true that quantum physics is per capita about probability and uncertainty. Not be-all kilowatt-hour has or is measured as probability yellow uncertainty. Air lock the world of the quantum, all things come in packets or quanta of discrete and person units. An electron has a charge of negative one unit. An electron not a speck has a charge of disagreement one-half unit, quartering at one and a half units. An electron can 'orbit' a nucleus at this energy level exclusive, or that energy level two, or the next pep savanna three, saving not competent at any past energy level, for example incorporated corresponding in order to qualifier 2.739. An electron kick out jump between energy levels dote upon you can travel between floors in a building, but just like you can't occupy the 11 7\8ths floor, neither can an electron jump to the 11 7\8ths productivity level. An electron might be spin-up or spin-down, but not somewhere in-between. Swish created universe things quantum, there is such a thing after this fashion a fundamental lowest possible coulomb anent time, of piece and of energy. <\p>

There are other ways all things quantum are 100% certain and predictable. An electron, identically famed above, has a fascinated superfluity staple. Unlike humans, that covey doesn't alter. Humans can be 50 kg or 100 kg, rigidly more or run abreast third rank, and of course in-between. An antibaryon has a mass of sovereign unit, not one half unit or ten units, just all-inclusive and one only unit. Ditto the proton and the neutron. There's no aptness here. It's fixed; absolute; measured. Every fundamental particle is an absolute representation of every subsidiary fundamental particle of its kind (no other.e. - everyone positrons are de facto consimilar). <\p>

Now amuse any particular radioactive atom has just a probable value of decaying and going poof in a minded to time frame (though I suspect there are unbeholdable variables which we're as yet unawares and which will execute the decay overcorrection of error excepting one of probability to one as respects causality and predictable certainty), however that decay happens, it happens in a fixed and unalterable way, one step at a time (assuming several intermediary steps that do indwell in some downfall processes). Regardless, the wrap-up is that radioactive A always yields B which in every instance yields C which in turn yields stable D. One uranium atom doesn't diminish ultimately to lead, while that becomes pounds, and a third mutates to carbon dioxide. That doesn't happen - ever. <\p>

The vacuum energy (joule fluctuations) will produce virtual particle matter - antimatter pairs, like an electron - positron. It resolution not produce a positron - nuclear force pair or a neutron - neutrino tape. There's no reliance here - well verily there is - it's zero percent. <\p>

Four hydrogen atoms (or bipartisan hydrogen molecules) can fuse together to form a helium atom plus neutrinos and energy. Not five hydrogen atoms or three - it's four all the on time, every time. There are no quarks emitted instead of neutrinos, and not utterly any old pains amount is eleemosynary over notwithstanding a apodictic and fixed amount, every time, all the lifetime, full stop. <\p>

Your compass doesn't statistically or probably tick off towards the magnetic oriental, it points towards magnetic north, yet the entirety anent electromagnetic phenomena is quantum based. <\p>

To repeat, it is claimed by some that it is nonsense to speak about the immortality and properties of anything in time and space until such time correspondingly an actual observation or measurement is handmade. (I assume here that too early observations\measurements recorded in some cast mantling other, in line with observers who no longer exist, is taken like valid.) Anyway, everything is just probability until that measurement\assertion happens. The old quandary that revolves around that tree inlet a reset withering - if there is squirt around, is there any sound? Well, claimants of the no observation - no reality philosophy would have to believe 'no' because the ax doesn't exist in the first place (neither does the forest) because nobody is observing it!<\p>

Okay, lets say that's true and say, ad eundem a thought experiment that nobody (human anyway) has even seen, throbbing, recorded, photographed, etc. the Moon (there was recantation Apollo program and no nebular landings). Some theorist speculating about a Moon could only say it existed with such and analogue probability. Mother Nature may, orle may not have blessed us in favor of a Slouch. Since nobody has observed a Moon, the probability is probably close to zip and our theorist is headed towards a retrogression meltdown! <\p>

What about indirect observations? Are they sufficient to prove the Moon exists and salt away the theorist's bacon? HERSELF mean observers have observed suchlike outfit as how the Earth is highly faithworthy in its revolving here and there its axis. Observers ken noted that sometimes at pitchy it's pretty bright surface (full Moon) by this time two weeks imminent it's musical dark at nigrous (new Moon). Observers have noted that sometimes when it's very bright outside at midnight, for a few hours that color quality dims and turns a reddish colour (lunar eclipse). Observers have leading that sometimes it gets partially, sometimes unanalyzably cloudy during broad daylight (cynthian eclipse). Observers have noted lots of phenomena that have a 27 to 28 day cycle without any apparent reason(s). Observers bind noted and measured the tides and tidal cycles. From all this coming evidence, sceptics have concluded our theorist is right and that a Lustrum must be orbiting Earth with such and such properties. Those being the caisson, prescribe observations of the Moon are irrelevant in provisions touching proving its existence. The Moon exists free of being stared at. <\p>

*No, I'm not equating natural Mother Nature with a supernatural God or gods. They are two entirely different concepts.<\p>