In 1967, Simon Kochen and Ernst Specker proved mathematically that even for a single quantum object, where entanglement is not possible, the values that you obtain when you measure its properties depend on the context. So the value of property A, say, depends on whether you chose to measure it with property B, or with property C. In other words, there is no reality independent of the choice of measurement.
Quantum magic trick shows reality is what you make it: New Scientist June 22, 2011
"the resulting statistics could only be explained if the combination of properties that was tested was affecting the value of the property being measured"
The article is about experiential confirmation of that statement.
They found that the resulting statistics could only be explained if the combination of properties that was tested was affecting the value of the property being measured. “There is no sense in assuming that what we do not measure about a system has [an independent] reality,” Zeilinger concludes.
Well, if what you get as a result is dependent on what you do include in consideration, there is no sense in assuming what you do not measure does not have an independent reality. It seems to me they want to have it both ways. If that were not a possibility, you wonder exactly what the significance of their experiment is supposed to be. I would wonder if it would not be rather pointless. Still:
Steinberg is impressed: “This is a beautiful experiment.” If previous experiments testing entanglement shut the door on hidden variables theories, the latest work seals it tight. “It appears that you can’t even conceive of a theory where specific observables would have definite values that are independent of the other things you measure,” adds Steinberg.
Kochen, now at Princeton University in New Jersey, is also happy. “Almost a half century after Specker and I proved our theorem, which was based on a [thought] experiment, real experiments now confirm our result,” he says.
Niels Bohr, a giant of quantum physics, was a great proponent of the idea that the nature of quantum reality depends on what we choose to measure, a notion that came to be called the Copenhagen interpretation. “This experiment lends more support to the Copenhagen interpretation,” says Zeilinger.
If the scientists are telling us that, it stand to reason that if you are going to define "reality" as what your experiment shows you and that choice is a direct product of the choices you make in HOW you look at things, then it's clear that that "reality" can tell you nothing about those things you chose to leave out of your consideration or what your "reality" would be if you included other things. Note, some of those other things may not be testable with the methods of science, in which case science couldn't tell you about them. That should not have seemed like an outlandish observation, it's been suspected for quite a while now. Why ideologues within science and the amateur sci-rangers think they can pretend the results they get based on the choices of what to include and to exclude can give you a comprehensive view of reality is worth asking, though it's a psychological, not a scientific matter. The science has been rather clear on that for a while now,the emotional preferences of atheist-materialist scientists haven't caught up and I expect they won't.
No comments:
Post a Comment