Paul J. van Leeuwen - Quantum Physics is NOT Weird

All the important contemporary interpretations of quantum physics are treated extensively in this book, either materialistic or consciousness oriented. It is up to the reader to make his or her own informed choice between them. For a deeper understanding, after having completed this book, there is a wealth of information on quantum physics available for self-study on the Internet, something I wholeheartedly recommend. You will also find a list of recommended literature at the end this book. I won’t ask you to master physics formulas and mathematic expressions that are more complex than E = mc 2.

In my opinion, you don’t really need mathematics to understand the meaning of quantum physics. Any formula that you will encounter in this book can be skipped without any consequences for your understanding. Being able to do mathematic calculations is not the same as understanding physical processes. However, do not skip the double-slit experiments that will be discussed.

Understanding the workings and the meaning of the double-slit is an essential part of the argumentation in this book. For that task I recommend the full dedication of your imaginative quantum coherent grey cells and also some perseverance.

To show you the eyebrow raising confusion concerning quantum physics, I present on the next page a small anthology of interesting quotes on quantum physics I encountered in different media:

• If you could behave yourself like an atomic nucleus you would sometimes be able, like a ghost, to go through a massive wall .

From: ‘ Life on the Edge’ [1]by Jim Al-Khalili and Johnjoe McFadden

• And then there is the phenomenon of ‘entanglement’ – something happening elsewhere, instantaneously and regardless of the distance, when you do something here. Concepts such as superposition and entanglement are too weird for words .

From: ‘ Real Quanta’ [ 2 ]by Martijn van Calmthout.

• In two places at the same time? “Quantum mechanics states that a particle such as an electron can be in two different states at the same time, and even in two different places, as long as it is not observed.

From: Loophole-free Bell test TU Delft crowns 80-years-old debate on nature of reality: Einsteins “spooky action” is real. [ 3 ]– Delft University of Technology – October 2015

• Quantum mechanics is one of the best-tested theories in science, and it's one of the few where physicists get to do experiments proving that Einstein was wrong. From: Physicists Prove Einstein Wrong With 'Spooky' Quantum Experiment [ 4 ]– NBC News, Jesse Emspak – March 2015

• Reality does not exist until we measure it, quantum experiment confirms. Mind = blown.

From: www.sciencealert.com, Fiona McDonald [ 5 ]– June 2015

• One of the oddest predictions of quantum theory – that a system cannot change while you're watching it – has been confirmed in an experiment by Cornell physicists . From: ‘ 'Zeno effect' verified – atoms won't move while you watch’ [ 6 ]– Phys.org – Bill Steele – October 2015

The aim of this book is that the reader should ultimately be able to judge, understand and value messages and statements like above on its own. At the end, we will investigate whether we can arrive at an explanatory model of nature in which all basic quantum phenomena are given a suitable place. The aim is that we can understand it without having to suffer inexplicable paradoxes. To achieve that lofty goal, we shouldn’t be scared off by paradoxes we will meet on the way. Instead, I aim to use these as the important road marks and signposts on the path to understanding reality.

When you have finished this book, I advise you refresh your opinion on the above quotes.

In this book I will approach quantum physics in the way I learned at the university, the scientific way: hypothesis, observations, predictions, and experiments. From this should rise an explanation of the quantum world, as simple, acceptable, and satisfying as possible.

“The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth.”

Niels Bohr, quantum physicist 1885-1962

What are paradoxes? Paradoxes are apparent contradictions with the emphasis on ‘apparent’. My approach in this book will be that every paradox we encounter is telling us that at least one of our basic assumptions is wrong. Thus, if we encounter a paradox, we are essentially invited to investigate where and how we went wrong. Such an investigation could uncover astounding new views on reality, views we deemed impossible. We just assumed that we knew 'how it is’. Fortunately, quantum physics abounds with interesting paradoxes and counter-intuitive statements such as:

‘Each physical object is simultaneously both a wave and a particle or a composite of elementary particles.’

‘A particle – or a composite of particles – can exist simultaneously in several places – almost everywhere and every time’. Statements like this are often expressed in articles describing new quantum physics experiments and in popular science books on quantum physics.

‘Two or more physical objects with a shared history remain connected, even when they are on opposite sides of the galaxy’. How does this relate to the fundamental statement of the theory of relativity that nothing – including information – can travel faster than the speed of light?

‘According to the interpretation of the Copenhagen school of quantum physicists, Bohr and Heisenberg, an object only exists in a physical sense when measured’. Where was the object prior to the measurement? What is the definition of a measurement? How does a measurement accomplish this feat?

Knowing already 'how things work' can be an obstacle to perceiving things as they are. Let’s experience the Ames Room illusion.

The image below shows how we are visually deceived by the ‘Ames Room'. Such a room has its dimensions adjusted to such an extent that – from a certain point of view – the objects and people in it seem to be too big or too small. We are being tripped up visually.

Figure 1.1: Ames room.

Source: siz.io

We ‘know’ what a room is. The concept of a room as a rectangular box seems to be a hardwired concept in our brains. So, if people tinker with this box form, they can play tricks on your visual system. Our brain keeps stubbornly telling us 'how it works’, even in spite of better information. Your visual neural network persists in telling you that the woman in figure 1.1 is a dwarf and that the man is a giant. Such an illusion is a visual paradox. On the Internet [1]you can find a lot of examples where your visual cortex is leading you astray.

Now imagine some stubborn person Mr. S who does not want to accept the distorted dimensions of the Ames room. What he sees, he says, is real. This Mr. S then will need a satisfactory explanation for his observation of objects changing their apparent sizes when moving through the room. He might for example, come up with an ‘Ames’ form field hypothesis. A hypothesis which assumes a certain kind of field that, depending on the position of objects in that field, enlarges or reduces its dimensions. This Ames field hypothesis can be formulated easily in such a way that it is predictive despite its wrongness.