Simplifying Quantum Mechanics Is Possible

Ignoring the script that insists, “the quantum world and the large scale world play by two different sets of rules”, this simple demonstration shows that there may be an equally simple explanation for “quantum” events and the “wave-particle duality” paradox. All of our observational data seems to confirm that elementary “items” at some level act both like waves and like particles that are mysteriously linked (entangled) to each other and can morph from one form to another in ways that defy conventional physics. Move past the resisting idea that those two characteristics are opposed to each other and the problem becomes describing what we observe in terms of both at the same time.

The silicone droplet suspended over the wave form is only being used as an analogy, but it offers an elegant usefulness in that regard. The model of a particle-like droplet and a wave-like surface that are dynamically interacting with each other may explain much. As Couder notes, “In any physics experiments, you only see what you are prepared to see.”

Yves Couder . Explains Wave/Particle Duality via Silicon Droplets [Through the Wormhole] – [youtube.com]

NOTE – this demonstration involves a droplet of SILICONE oil, not SILICON the element, as spelled in the video title.

[WARNING – READING BEYOND THIS POINT WILL INVOLVE DIVING DEEPLY DOWN A RABBIT HOLE]

Why bouncing droplets are a pretty good model of quantum mechanics – [lightbluetouchpaper.org]

Today Robert Brady and I publish a paper that solves an outstanding problem in physics. We explain the beautiful bouncing droplet experiments of Yves Couder, Emmanuel Fort and their colleagues.

For years now, people interested in the foundations of physics have been intrigued by the fact that droplets bouncing on a vibrating tray of fluid can behave in many ways like quantum mechanical particles, with single-slit and double-slit diffraction, tunneling, Anderson localisation and quantised orbits.

A further observation on quantum computing – [lightbluetouchpaper.org]

Today we’ve published a paper showing that Bell’s inequality is violated in fluid mechanics. What has this to do with computing or security? Well, when we posted a paper back in February pointing out that hydrodynamic models of quantum physics raise questions about the scalability of quantum computing, a number of people asked for a better explanation of how this squares with the Bell tests. John Bell proved an inequality in 1964 that applies to classical particles but that is broken by quantum mechanical ones. In today’s paper we show that Bell’s inequality does not hold in classical fluid dynamics, as angular momentum and energy are delocalised in the fluid.

Hard questions about quantum crypto and quantum computing – [lightbluetouchpaper.org]

We’ve been assured for 29 years that quantum crypto is secure, and for 19 years that quantum computing is set to make public-key cryptography obsolete. Yet despite immense research funding, attempts to build a quantum computer that scales beyond a few qubits have failed. What’s going on?

In a new paper Why quantum computing is hard – and quantum cryptography is not provably secure, Robert Brady and I try to analyse what’s going on. We argue that quantum entanglement may be modelled by coupled oscillators (as it already is in the study of Josephson junctions) and this could explain why it’s hard to get more than about three qubits. A companion paper of Robert’s on The irrotational motion of a compressible inviscid fluid presents a soliton model of the electron which shows for the first time how spin-1/2 symmetry, and the Dirac equation, can emerge in a completely classical system. There has been a growing amount of work recently on classical models of quantum behaviour; see for example Yves Couder’s beautiful experiments.

Comments are closed.