TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Does anyone else think about quantum physics on a daily basis?

2 点作者 jtfrench超过 11 年前
I&#x27;m no quantum physicist, or quantum mechanic, or quantum leaper, but I know one of my bits kinda flipped the day I read&#x2F;heard something along the lines of (and please excuse the terrible paraphrasing, i&#x27;m just a lowly non-quantum programmer):<p>+ Scientists have found that sub-atomic particulars flicker in and out of existence&#x2F;our &quot;awareness&quot; all the time (sometimes like a wave, sometimes like a particle, even the densest parts of atoms aren&#x27;t &quot;dense&quot;)<p>+ The phenomena of something &quot;snapping into place&quot; only after the scientist (&quot;observer&quot;) observes it. Like things mainly exists as &quot;probability clouds&quot; and then those probabilities start narrowing as the observer narrows their focus.<p>Now I&#x27;m sure I&#x27;m butchering all of the scientific details (and I do apologize for that), but my question is two-fold:<p>a) Does anyone have a better, first-hand, understanding and&#x2F;or experience with this that they can share (in layman&#x27;s terms)?<p>b) And, if these principles are &quot;true&quot; — why aren&#x27;t most people talking about this&#x2F;freaking out?<p>Wouldn&#x27;t this be something that&#x27;s like....I dunno....kind of a big deal? Like &quot;oh shit, the jedi knights were right&quot;?<p>I&#x27;m sure there&#x27;s some quantum genius on here who can just drop the mike on this one...

5 条评论

andrewflnr超过 11 年前
You&#x27;ll be better served by reading &quot;observation&quot; as &quot;interaction&quot;. In my understanding, wave functions collapse when the particle&#x2F;wave&#x2F;whatever interacts with something else, like maybe a particle detector. It doesn&#x27;t really matter whether there&#x27;s a conscious scientist watching the display.<p>Also, what helps me wrap my head around QM is to tell myself not that quanta are waves and particles at the same time, but that what we see as waves and particles are just special cases of &quot;the real thing&quot; we see in QM. The way my physics professor put it is that things move like waves (interference, etc) and interact like particles (at a location).<p>As for atoms, yeah, what we think of as &quot;solidity&quot; is just electrical repulsion between atoms in your hand and atoms in the table. It doesn&#x27;t really change anything. You can still sit on chairs and it takes effort to accelerate things.<p>I recommend examining the actual experiments used to determine the freaky properties of wave-particle duality, and maybe try to understand some of the math. Look at the photo-electric effect, the double-slit experiment, de Broglie wavelength, and the physical reasons for the uncertainly principle (that one in particular makes perfect sense). It won&#x27;t all exactly make more sense, but it won&#x27;t be as mysterious. It&#x27;s still physics, not magic.<p>Disclaimer: I&#x27;ve read a lot of layman stuff on QM, and I&#x27;m taking a course involving it right now, but we haven&#x27;t gotten to the really juicy bits yet.
评论 #7363413 未加载
turnip1979超过 11 年前
This isn&#x27;t about QM per say, but may I suggest you read Richard Feynman&#x27;s book: &quot;Surely you&#x27;re joking? Mr. Feynman!&quot; It was a hugely entertaining read. Be warned: there is some content in the book that may be a <i>bit</i> politically incorrect.
评论 #7363419 未加载
softwareman超过 11 年前
I do too. In terms of the age old deterministic vs non- deterministic dilemma. I think this observation supports that nothing can be predicted but yet we can&#x27;t think of us as in control of our destiny either.
评论 #7363418 未加载
siromoney超过 11 年前
There&#x27;s that joke about Heisenberg, he&#x27;s stopped by a cop for speeding and asked &quot;Do you know how fast you were going?&quot;
Drag0n超过 11 年前
I do, yes. Despite not knowing that much about it.