{"id":403,"date":"2007-08-04T20:08:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-05T03:08:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/breckenridge\/?p=403"},"modified":"2008-10-25T23:37:33","modified_gmt":"2008-10-26T06:37:33","slug":"is-reality-a-misunderstanding","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403","title":{"rendered":"Is Reality a misunderstanding?"},"content":{"rendered":"
April 29, 2007Special to <\/span>World Science<\/span><\/div>\n

\nSev\u00ader\u00adal phys\u00adi\u00adcists say they\u2019ve con\u00adfirmed strange pre\u00addic\u00adtions of mod\u00adern phys\u00adics that clash with our most bas\u00adic no\u00adtions of real\u00adi\u00adty and even sug\u00adgest\u2014some sci\u00aden\u00adtists and phi\u00adloso\u00adphers say\u2014that real\u00adi\u00adty is\u00adn\u2019t \"\"<\/a>there when we\u2019re not look\u00ading.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The pre\u00addic\u00adtions have lurked with\u00adin quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics, the sci\u00adence of the small\u00adest things, since the field emerged in the 1920s; but not all phys\u00adi\u00adcists ac\u00adcept\u00aded them. They were un\u00addis\u00adput\u00adedly con\u00adsist\u00adent with ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments, but ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments might not re\u00adveal eve\u00adry\u00adthing.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
New tests\u2014de\u00adsigned more specif\u00adi\u00adcally than be\u00adfore to probe the real\u00adi\u00adty ques\u00adtion\u2014have yielded un\u00adset\u00adtling re\u00adsults, say re\u00adsearch\u00aders who pub\u00adlished the find\u00adings in the April 19 is\u00adsue of the re\u00adsearch jour\u00adnal Na\u00adture. One of their col\u00adleagues called the find\u00adings in\u00adtri\u00adguing but in\u00adcon\u00adclu\u00adsive.<\/p>\n

The background<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
Quan\u00adtum phys\u00adi\u00adcists have long not\u00aded that sub\u00ada\u00adtom\u00adic par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles seem to move ran\u00addom\u00adly. For in\u00adstance, one can meas\u00adure a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle\u2019s lo\u00adca\u00adtion at a giv\u00aden mo\u00adment, but can\u2019t know ex\u00adact\u00adly where it would be just be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Phys\u00adi\u00adcists de\u00adter\u00admined that the ran\u00addom\u00adness was\u00adn\u2019t just an ap\u00adpear\u00adance due to our ig\u00adno\u00adrance of the de\u00adtails of the mo\u00adtion, but an in\u00ades\u00adcap\u00ada\u00adble prop\u00ader\u00adty of the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles them\u00adselves. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Rath\u00ader per\u00adsua\u00adsive ev\u00adi\u00addence for this lay in math. Par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles, for rea\u00adsons no one quite knows, some\u00adtimes act like waves. When they come to\u00adgeth\u00ader, they cre\u00adate the same types of com\u00adplex pat\u00adterns that ap\u00adpear when wa\u00adter rip\u00adples from dif\u00adfer\u00adent di\u00adrec\u00adtions over\u00adlap. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
But a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle, be\u00ading at least some\u00adwhat con\u00adfined in space, nor\u00admal\u00adly acts on\u00adly as a small \u201cwave pack\u00adet\u201d\u2014a clus\u00adter of a few rip\u00adples in suc\u00adces\u00adsion\u2014un\u00adlike fa\u00admil\u00adiar waves, in which doz\u00adens or thou\u00adsands pa\u00adrade along. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
It turns out there is a math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal way to rep\u00adre\u00adsent a wave pack\u00adet; but you must start by rep\u00adre\u00adsenting an in\u00adfi\u00adnite\u00adly re\u00adpeat\u00ading wave, which is a sim\u00adpler for\u00admu\u00adla. Adding up many such de\u00adpic\u00adtions, if you choose them prop\u00ader\u00adly, gives the packet. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Yet there\u2019s a catch: each of these com\u00adpo\u00adnents must have a slight\u00adly dif\u00adfer\u00adent wave speed. Thus, the com\u00adplete pack\u00adet has no clear-cut speed. Nor, con\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly, does the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The previous experiments<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Pre\u00adcise\u00adly in line with such math, ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments find that par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle speed is some\u00adwhat ran\u00addom, though the ran\u00addom\u00adness fol\u00adlows rules that again mir\u00adror the equa\u00adtions. When you meas\u00adure speed, you do get a num\u00adber, but that won\u2019t tell you the speed a mo\u00adment be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. In es\u00adsence, phys\u00adi\u00adcists con\u00adclud\u00aded, the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle has no de\u00adfined ve\u00adloc\u00adi\u00adty un\u00adtil you meas\u00adure it. Si\u00adm\u00adi\u00adlar con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions turned out to hold for its lo\u00adca\u00adtion, spin and oth\u00ader prop\u00ader\u00adties.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The im\u00adpli\u00adca\u00adtions were huge: the ran\u00addom\u00adness im\u00adplied that key prop\u00ader\u00adties of these ob\u00adjects, per\u00adhaps the ob\u00adjects them\u00adselves, might not ex\u00adist un\u00adless we are watch\u00ading. \u201cNo el\u00ade\u00admen\u00adta\u00adry phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon is a phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon un\u00adtil it is an ob\u00adserved phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon,\u201d the cel\u00ade\u00adbrat\u00aded Prince\u00adton Uni\u00adver\u00adsi\u00adty phys\u00adi\u00adcist John Wheel\u00ader put it.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Still, human-made math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal mod\u00adels don\u2019t nec\u00ades\u00adsar\u00adi\u00adly re\u00adflect ul\u00adti\u00admate truth, even if they do match ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00admen\u00adtal re\u00adsults bril\u00adliant\u00adly. And those tests them\u00adselves might miss some\u00adthing. Sci\u00aden\u00adtists in\u00adclud\u00ading Ein\u00adstein balked at the ran\u00addom\u00adness idea\u2014\u201cGod does not play dice,\u201d he fa\u00admous\u00adly fumed\u2014and the con\u00adse\u00adquent col\u00adlapse of cher\u00adished as\u00adsump\u00adtions. The great phys\u00adi\u00adcist joined oth\u00aders in pro\u00adpos\u00ading that there ex\u00adist some yet-unknown fac\u00adtors, or \u201chid\u00adden vari\u00adables,\u201d that in\u00adflu\u00adence par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle prop\u00ader\u00adties, mak\u00ading these look ran\u00addom with\u00adout tru\u00adly be\u00ading so. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Phys\u00adi\u00adcists in due course de\u00adsigned ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments to test for hid\u00adden vari\u00adables. In 1964 John Bell de\u00advised such a test. He ex\u00adploited a cu\u00adri\u00adous phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon called \u201cen\u00adtan\u00adgle\u00adment,\u201d in which know\u00ading some\u00adthing about one par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle some\u00adtimes tells you a cor\u00adre\u00adspond\u00ading prop\u00ader\u00adty of anoth\u00ader, no mat\u00adter the dis\u00adtance be\u00adtween them.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
An ex\u00adam\u00adple oc\u00adcurs when cer\u00adtain par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles de\u00adcay, or break up, in\u00adto two pho\u00adtons\u2014par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles of light. These fly off in op\u00adpo\u00adsite di\u00adrec\u00adtions and have the same po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion, or amount by which the wave is tilted in space. De\u00adtec\u00adtors called po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders can meas\u00adure this at\u00adtrib\u00adute. Po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are like ti\u00adny fences with slits. If the slits are tilted the same way as the wave, it goes through; if op\u00adpo\u00adsitely, it does\u00adn\u2019t; if some\u00adwhere in be\u00adtween, it may or may not pass.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
If you meas\u00adure the two op\u00adpo\u00adsitely-flying pho\u00adtons with po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders tilted the same way, you get the same re\u00adsult for both. But if one of the po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders is tilted a bit, you will get oc\u00adca\u00adsion\u00adal dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
What if you al\u00adso tilt the sec\u00adond po\u00adlar\u00adizer by the same amount, but the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way? You might get twice as many dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments, Bell rea\u00adsoned. But you might al\u00adso get less than that, be\u00adcause some po\u00adten\u00adtial dis\u00adagree\u00adments could can\u00adcel each oth\u00ader out. For ex\u00adam\u00adple: two pho\u00adtons might be blocked where\u00adas orig\u00adi\u00adnal\u00adly they both would have pas\u00adsed, so two de\u00advi\u00ada\u00adtions from the orig\u00adi\u00adnal re\u00adsult lead to an agree\u00adment.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
All this fol\u00adlows from log\u00adic. It al\u00adso de\u00adpends on cer\u00adtain rea\u00adson\u00ada\u00adble as\u00adsump\u00adtions, in\u00adclud\u00ading that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles have a real po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion wheth\u00ader it\u2019s meas\u00adured or not. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
But Bell, in an ar\u00adgu\u00adment known as Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, showed that quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics pre\u00addicts anoth\u00ader out\u00adcome, im\u00adply\u00ading this \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d as\u00adsump\u00adtion might be wrong. Quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics claims that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults when both po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are op\u00adpo\u00adsitely tilt\u00aded\u2014com\u00adpared to one be\u00ading tilt\u00aded\u2014can be more than twice as many. And ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have borne this out.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The rea\u00adsons why have to do with yet anoth\u00ader odd pre\u00addic\u00adtion of quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics. Once you de\u00adtect the pho\u00adton as ei\u00adther hav\u00ading crossed the po\u00adlar\u00adizer or not, then it\u2019s ei\u00adther po\u00adlar\u00adized ex\u00adact\u00adly in the di\u00adrec\u00adtion of the in\u00adstru\u00adment, or the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way, re\u00adspec\u00adtive\u00adly. It can\u2019t be po\u00adlar\u00adized at any oth\u00ader an\u00adgle. And its \u201ctwin\u201d must be iden\u00adti\u00adcal\u00adly po\u00adlar\u00adized. All this puts ad\u00addi\u00adtion\u00adal con\u00ads\u00adt\u00adraints on the sys\u00adtem such that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments can rise com\u00adpared to the \u201clog\u00adical\u201d re\u00adsult. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Past ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have con\u00adfirmed the seem\u00adingly non\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal out\u00adcome. Yet this alone this does\u00adn\u2019t dis\u00adprove the \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d hy\u00adpoth\u00ade\u00adsis, re\u00adsearch\u00aders say. There\u2019s one oth\u00ader pos\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty, which is that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles are some\u00adhow in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adously com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adcat\u00ading, like telepaths.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The new experiment<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The new ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adment was de\u00adsigned to side\u00adstep this loop\u00adhole: it was set up so that even al\u00adlow\u00ading for in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adous com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtion could\u00adn\u2019t ex\u00adplain the \u201cnon\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal\u201d out\u00adcome, at least not eas\u00adi\u00adly. One would al\u00adso have to drop the no\u00adtion that pho\u00adtons have a def\u00adi\u00adnite po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion in\u00adde\u00adpend\u00adent of any meas\u00adurement. <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The work, by Si\u00admon Groe\u00adblacher and col\u00adleagues at the Aus\u00adtri\u00adan Acad\u00ade\u00admy of Sci\u00adences\u2019 In\u00adsti\u00adtute for Quan\u00adtum Op\u00adtics and Quan\u00adtum In\u00adfor\u00adma\u00adtion in Vi\u00aden\u00adna, was based not on Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, but on a re\u00adlat\u00aded the\u00ado\u00adrem more re\u00adcent\u00adly de\u00advel\u00adoped by An\u00adtho\u00adny Leg\u00adgett at the Uni\u00adver\u00adsi\u00adty of Il\u00adli\u00adnois at Urbana-Champaign.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Full ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments based on Leggett\u2019s con\u00adcept re\u00adquired an\u00ada\u00adlyz\u00ading pho\u00adton-waves that are po\u00adlar\u00adized \u201cel\u00adlip\u00adti\u00adcally,\u201d which means a wave\u2019s tilt changes con\u00adstant\u00adly. One can de\u00adtect this by sup\u00adple\u00adment\u00ading the po\u00adlar\u00adizer with a strip of ma\u00adte\u00adri\u00adal that\u2019s bi\u00adre\u00adfrin\u00adgent, mean\u00ading it bends light dif\u00adfer\u00adently de\u00adpend\u00ading on its di\u00adrec\u00adtion.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The re\u00adsults in\u00addeed dis\u00adproved that pho\u00adtons have a def\u00adi\u00adnite, in\u00adde\u00adpend\u00adently ex\u00adisting po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion, Markus As\u00adpelmeyer, a mem\u00adber of the re\u00adsearch team, wrote in an e\u00admail. The find\u00adings thus spell trou\u00adble for one \u201cplau\u00adsi\u00adble no\u00adtion of real\u00adism,\u201d he added, though oth\u00aders could con\u00adceiv\u00ada\u00adbly sur\u00advive.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Not eve\u00adry\u00adone is con\u00advinced. \u201cThe con\u00adclu\u00adsion one draws is more a ques\u00adtion of taste than log\u00adic,\u201d wrote Alain As\u00adpect, who con\u00adducted the first con\u00adclu\u00adsive tests of Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, in a com\u00admen\u00adtary in the same is\u00adsue of the jour\u00adnal. As\u00adpect, of the \u00c9cole Poly\u00adtech\u00adnique in Pa\u00adlai\u00ads\u00adeau, France, ar\u00adgued that the find\u00adings can still be ex\u00adplained by claim\u00ading cer\u00adtain forms of in\u00ads\u00adtan\u00adt\u00ada\u00adne\u00adous com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtion. But he con\u00adced\u00aded that he too is in\u00adclined to re\u00adnounce as\u00adpects of real\u00adism in\u00adstead. Such ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments, and the re\u00adsulting de\u00adbates, \u201cal\u00adlow us to look deeper in\u00adto the great mys\u00adter\u00adies of quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics,\u201d he added<\/span><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

April 29, 2007Special to World Science Sev\u00ader\u00adal phys\u00adi\u00adcists say they\u2019ve con\u00adfirmed strange pre\u00addic\u00adtions of mod\u00adern phys\u00adics that clash with our most bas\u00adic no\u00adtions of real\u00adi\u00adty and even sug\u00adgest\u2014some sci\u00aden\u00adtists and phi\u00adloso\u00adphers say\u2014that real\u00adi\u00adty is\u00adn\u2019t there when we\u2019re not look\u00ading. The pre\u00addic\u00adtions have lurked with\u00adin quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics, the sci\u00adence of the small\u00adest things, since the field emerged in the 1920s; but not all phys\u00adi\u00adcists ac\u00adcept\u00aded them. They were un\u00addis\u00adput\u00adedly con\u00adsist\u00adent with ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments, but ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments might not re\u00adveal eve\u00adry\u00adthing. New tests\u2014de\u00adsigned more specif\u00adi\u00adcally than be\u00adfore to probe the real\u00adi\u00adty ques\u00adtion\u2014have yielded un\u00adset\u00adtling re\u00adsults, say re\u00adsearch\u00aders who pub\u00adlished the find\u00adings in the April 19 is\u00adsue of the re\u00adsearch jour\u00adnal Na\u00adture. One of their col\u00adleagues called the find\u00adings in\u00adtri\u00adguing but in\u00adcon\u00adclu\u00adsive. The background Quan\u00adtum phys\u00adi\u00adcists have long not\u00aded that sub\u00ada\u00adtom\u00adic par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles seem to move ran\u00addom\u00adly. For in\u00adstance, one can meas\u00adure a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle\u2019s lo\u00adca\u00adtion at a giv\u00aden mo\u00adment, but can\u2019t know ex\u00adact\u00adly where it would be just be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists de\u00adter\u00admined that the ran\u00addom\u00adness was\u00adn\u2019t just an ap\u00adpear\u00adance due to our ig\u00adno\u00adrance of the de\u00adtails of the mo\u00adtion, but an in\u00ades\u00adcap\u00ada\u00adble prop\u00ader\u00adty of the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles them\u00adselves. Rath\u00ader per\u00adsua\u00adsive ev\u00adi\u00addence for this lay in math. Par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles, for rea\u00adsons no one quite knows, some\u00adtimes act like waves. When they come to\u00adgeth\u00ader, they cre\u00adate the same types of com\u00adplex pat\u00adterns that ap\u00adpear when wa\u00adter rip\u00adples from dif\u00adfer\u00adent di\u00adrec\u00adtions over\u00adlap. But a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle, be\u00ading at least some\u00adwhat con\u00adfined in space, nor\u00admal\u00adly acts on\u00adly as a small \u201cwave pack\u00adet\u201d\u2014a clus\u00adter of a few rip\u00adples in suc\u00adces\u00adsion\u2014un\u00adlike fa\u00admil\u00adiar waves, in which doz\u00adens or thou\u00adsands pa\u00adrade along. It turns out there is a math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal way to rep\u00adre\u00adsent a wave pack\u00adet; but you must start by rep\u00adre\u00adsenting an in\u00adfi\u00adnite\u00adly re\u00adpeat\u00ading wave, which is a sim\u00adpler for\u00admu\u00adla. Adding up many such de\u00adpic\u00adtions, if you choose them prop\u00ader\u00adly, gives the packet. Yet there\u2019s a catch: each of these com\u00adpo\u00adnents must have a slight\u00adly dif\u00adfer\u00adent wave speed. Thus, the com\u00adplete pack\u00adet has no clear-cut speed. Nor, con\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly, does the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle. The previous experiments Pre\u00adcise\u00adly in line with such math, ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments find that par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle speed is some\u00adwhat ran\u00addom, though the ran\u00addom\u00adness fol\u00adlows rules that again mir\u00adror the equa\u00adtions. When you meas\u00adure speed, you do get a num\u00adber, but that won\u2019t tell you the speed a mo\u00adment be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. In es\u00adsence, phys\u00adi\u00adcists con\u00adclud\u00aded, the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle has no de\u00adfined ve\u00adloc\u00adi\u00adty un\u00adtil you meas\u00adure it. Si\u00adm\u00adi\u00adlar con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions turned out to hold for its lo\u00adca\u00adtion, spin and oth\u00ader prop\u00ader\u00adties. The im\u00adpli\u00adca\u00adtions were huge: the ran\u00addom\u00adness im\u00adplied that key prop\u00ader\u00adties of these ob\u00adjects, per\u00adhaps the ob\u00adjects them\u00adselves, might not ex\u00adist un\u00adless we are watch\u00ading. \u201cNo el\u00ade\u00admen\u00adta\u00adry phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon is a phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon un\u00adtil it is an ob\u00adserved phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon,\u201d the cel\u00ade\u00adbrat\u00aded Prince\u00adton Uni\u00adver\u00adsi\u00adty phys\u00adi\u00adcist John Wheel\u00ader put it. Still, human-made math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal mod\u00adels don\u2019t nec\u00ades\u00adsar\u00adi\u00adly re\u00adflect ul\u00adti\u00admate truth, even if they do match ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00admen\u00adtal re\u00adsults bril\u00adliant\u00adly. And those tests them\u00adselves might miss some\u00adthing. Sci\u00aden\u00adtists in\u00adclud\u00ading Ein\u00adstein balked at the ran\u00addom\u00adness idea\u2014\u201cGod does not play dice,\u201d he fa\u00admous\u00adly fumed\u2014and the con\u00adse\u00adquent col\u00adlapse of cher\u00adished as\u00adsump\u00adtions. The great phys\u00adi\u00adcist joined oth\u00aders in pro\u00adpos\u00ading that there ex\u00adist some yet-unknown fac\u00adtors, or \u201chid\u00adden vari\u00adables,\u201d that in\u00adflu\u00adence par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle prop\u00ader\u00adties, mak\u00ading these look ran\u00addom with\u00adout tru\u00adly be\u00ading so. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists in due course de\u00adsigned ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments to test for hid\u00adden vari\u00adables. In 1964 John Bell de\u00advised such a test. He ex\u00adploited a cu\u00adri\u00adous phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon called \u201cen\u00adtan\u00adgle\u00adment,\u201d in which know\u00ading some\u00adthing about one par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle some\u00adtimes tells you a cor\u00adre\u00adspond\u00ading prop\u00ader\u00adty of anoth\u00ader, no mat\u00adter the dis\u00adtance be\u00adtween them. An ex\u00adam\u00adple oc\u00adcurs when cer\u00adtain par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles de\u00adcay, or break up, in\u00adto two pho\u00adtons\u2014par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles of light. These fly off in op\u00adpo\u00adsite di\u00adrec\u00adtions and have the same po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion, or amount by which the wave is tilted in space. De\u00adtec\u00adtors called po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders can meas\u00adure this at\u00adtrib\u00adute. Po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are like ti\u00adny fences with slits. If the slits are tilted the same way as the wave, it goes through; if op\u00adpo\u00adsitely, it does\u00adn\u2019t; if some\u00adwhere in be\u00adtween, it may or may not pass. If you meas\u00adure the two op\u00adpo\u00adsitely-flying pho\u00adtons with po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders tilted the same way, you get the same re\u00adsult for both. But if one of the po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders is tilted a bit, you will get oc\u00adca\u00adsion\u00adal dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults. What if you al\u00adso tilt the sec\u00adond po\u00adlar\u00adizer by the same amount, but the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way? You might get twice as many dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments, Bell rea\u00adsoned. But you might al\u00adso get less than that, be\u00adcause some po\u00adten\u00adtial dis\u00adagree\u00adments could can\u00adcel each oth\u00ader out. For ex\u00adam\u00adple: two pho\u00adtons might be blocked where\u00adas orig\u00adi\u00adnal\u00adly they both would have pas\u00adsed, so two de\u00advi\u00ada\u00adtions from the orig\u00adi\u00adnal re\u00adsult lead to an agree\u00adment. All this fol\u00adlows from log\u00adic. It al\u00adso de\u00adpends on cer\u00adtain rea\u00adson\u00ada\u00adble as\u00adsump\u00adtions, in\u00adclud\u00ading that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles have a real po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion wheth\u00ader it\u2019s meas\u00adured or not. But Bell, in an ar\u00adgu\u00adment known as Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, showed that quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics pre\u00addicts anoth\u00ader out\u00adcome, im\u00adply\u00ading this \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d as\u00adsump\u00adtion might be wrong. Quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics claims that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults when both po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are op\u00adpo\u00adsitely tilt\u00aded\u2014com\u00adpared to one be\u00ading tilt\u00aded\u2014can be more than twice as many. And ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have borne this out. The rea\u00adsons why have to do with yet anoth\u00ader odd pre\u00addic\u00adtion of quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics. Once you de\u00adtect the pho\u00adton as ei\u00adther hav\u00ading crossed the po\u00adlar\u00adizer or not, then it\u2019s ei\u00adther po\u00adlar\u00adized ex\u00adact\u00adly in the di\u00adrec\u00adtion of the in\u00adstru\u00adment, or the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way, re\u00adspec\u00adtive\u00adly. It can\u2019t be po\u00adlar\u00adized at any oth\u00ader an\u00adgle. And its \u201ctwin\u201d must be iden\u00adti\u00adcal\u00adly po\u00adlar\u00adized. All this puts ad\u00addi\u00adtion\u00adal con\u00ads\u00adt\u00adraints on the sys\u00adtem such that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments can rise com\u00adpared to the \u201clog\u00adical\u201d re\u00adsult. Past ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have con\u00adfirmed the seem\u00adingly non\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal out\u00adcome. Yet this alone this does\u00adn\u2019t dis\u00adprove the \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d hy\u00adpoth\u00ade\u00adsis, re\u00adsearch\u00aders say. There\u2019s one oth\u00ader pos\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty, which is that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles are some\u00adhow in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adously com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adcat\u00ading, like telepaths. The new experiment The new ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adment was de\u00adsigned to side\u00adstep this loop\u00adhole: it was set up so that even al\u00adlow\u00ading for in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adous com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtion could\u00adn\u2019t ex\u00adplain the \u201cnon\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal\u201d out\u00adcome, at least not eas\u00adi\u00adly. One would al\u00adso have to drop the no\u00adtion that pho\u00adtons have a def\u00adi\u00adnite po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion in\u00adde\u00adpend\u00adent of any meas\u00adurement. The work, by Si\u00admon Groe\u00adblacher and col\u00adleagues … Continue reading Is Reality a misunderstanding?<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-hmmm"],"yoast_head":"\nIs Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Is Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"April 29, 2007Special to World Science Sev\u00ader\u00adal phys\u00adi\u00adcists say they\u2019ve con\u00adfirmed strange pre\u00addic\u00adtions of mod\u00adern phys\u00adics that clash with our most bas\u00adic no\u00adtions of real\u00adi\u00adty and even sug\u00adgest\u2014some sci\u00aden\u00adtists and phi\u00adloso\u00adphers say\u2014that real\u00adi\u00adty is\u00adn\u2019t there when we\u2019re not look\u00ading. The pre\u00addic\u00adtions have lurked with\u00adin quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics, the sci\u00adence of the small\u00adest things, since the field emerged in the 1920s; but not all phys\u00adi\u00adcists ac\u00adcept\u00aded them. They were un\u00addis\u00adput\u00adedly con\u00adsist\u00adent with ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments, but ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments might not re\u00adveal eve\u00adry\u00adthing. New tests\u2014de\u00adsigned more specif\u00adi\u00adcally than be\u00adfore to probe the real\u00adi\u00adty ques\u00adtion\u2014have yielded un\u00adset\u00adtling re\u00adsults, say re\u00adsearch\u00aders who pub\u00adlished the find\u00adings in the April 19 is\u00adsue of the re\u00adsearch jour\u00adnal Na\u00adture. One of their col\u00adleagues called the find\u00adings in\u00adtri\u00adguing but in\u00adcon\u00adclu\u00adsive. The background Quan\u00adtum phys\u00adi\u00adcists have long not\u00aded that sub\u00ada\u00adtom\u00adic par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles seem to move ran\u00addom\u00adly. For in\u00adstance, one can meas\u00adure a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle\u2019s lo\u00adca\u00adtion at a giv\u00aden mo\u00adment, but can\u2019t know ex\u00adact\u00adly where it would be just be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists de\u00adter\u00admined that the ran\u00addom\u00adness was\u00adn\u2019t just an ap\u00adpear\u00adance due to our ig\u00adno\u00adrance of the de\u00adtails of the mo\u00adtion, but an in\u00ades\u00adcap\u00ada\u00adble prop\u00ader\u00adty of the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles them\u00adselves. Rath\u00ader per\u00adsua\u00adsive ev\u00adi\u00addence for this lay in math. Par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles, for rea\u00adsons no one quite knows, some\u00adtimes act like waves. When they come to\u00adgeth\u00ader, they cre\u00adate the same types of com\u00adplex pat\u00adterns that ap\u00adpear when wa\u00adter rip\u00adples from dif\u00adfer\u00adent di\u00adrec\u00adtions over\u00adlap. But a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle, be\u00ading at least some\u00adwhat con\u00adfined in space, nor\u00admal\u00adly acts on\u00adly as a small \u201cwave pack\u00adet\u201d\u2014a clus\u00adter of a few rip\u00adples in suc\u00adces\u00adsion\u2014un\u00adlike fa\u00admil\u00adiar waves, in which doz\u00adens or thou\u00adsands pa\u00adrade along. It turns out there is a math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal way to rep\u00adre\u00adsent a wave pack\u00adet; but you must start by rep\u00adre\u00adsenting an in\u00adfi\u00adnite\u00adly re\u00adpeat\u00ading wave, which is a sim\u00adpler for\u00admu\u00adla. Adding up many such de\u00adpic\u00adtions, if you choose them prop\u00ader\u00adly, gives the packet. Yet there\u2019s a catch: each of these com\u00adpo\u00adnents must have a slight\u00adly dif\u00adfer\u00adent wave speed. Thus, the com\u00adplete pack\u00adet has no clear-cut speed. Nor, con\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly, does the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle. The previous experiments Pre\u00adcise\u00adly in line with such math, ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments find that par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle speed is some\u00adwhat ran\u00addom, though the ran\u00addom\u00adness fol\u00adlows rules that again mir\u00adror the equa\u00adtions. When you meas\u00adure speed, you do get a num\u00adber, but that won\u2019t tell you the speed a mo\u00adment be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. In es\u00adsence, phys\u00adi\u00adcists con\u00adclud\u00aded, the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle has no de\u00adfined ve\u00adloc\u00adi\u00adty un\u00adtil you meas\u00adure it. Si\u00adm\u00adi\u00adlar con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions turned out to hold for its lo\u00adca\u00adtion, spin and oth\u00ader prop\u00ader\u00adties. The im\u00adpli\u00adca\u00adtions were huge: the ran\u00addom\u00adness im\u00adplied that key prop\u00ader\u00adties of these ob\u00adjects, per\u00adhaps the ob\u00adjects them\u00adselves, might not ex\u00adist un\u00adless we are watch\u00ading. \u201cNo el\u00ade\u00admen\u00adta\u00adry phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon is a phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon un\u00adtil it is an ob\u00adserved phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon,\u201d the cel\u00ade\u00adbrat\u00aded Prince\u00adton Uni\u00adver\u00adsi\u00adty phys\u00adi\u00adcist John Wheel\u00ader put it. Still, human-made math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal mod\u00adels don\u2019t nec\u00ades\u00adsar\u00adi\u00adly re\u00adflect ul\u00adti\u00admate truth, even if they do match ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00admen\u00adtal re\u00adsults bril\u00adliant\u00adly. And those tests them\u00adselves might miss some\u00adthing. Sci\u00aden\u00adtists in\u00adclud\u00ading Ein\u00adstein balked at the ran\u00addom\u00adness idea\u2014\u201cGod does not play dice,\u201d he fa\u00admous\u00adly fumed\u2014and the con\u00adse\u00adquent col\u00adlapse of cher\u00adished as\u00adsump\u00adtions. The great phys\u00adi\u00adcist joined oth\u00aders in pro\u00adpos\u00ading that there ex\u00adist some yet-unknown fac\u00adtors, or \u201chid\u00adden vari\u00adables,\u201d that in\u00adflu\u00adence par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle prop\u00ader\u00adties, mak\u00ading these look ran\u00addom with\u00adout tru\u00adly be\u00ading so. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists in due course de\u00adsigned ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments to test for hid\u00adden vari\u00adables. In 1964 John Bell de\u00advised such a test. He ex\u00adploited a cu\u00adri\u00adous phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon called \u201cen\u00adtan\u00adgle\u00adment,\u201d in which know\u00ading some\u00adthing about one par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle some\u00adtimes tells you a cor\u00adre\u00adspond\u00ading prop\u00ader\u00adty of anoth\u00ader, no mat\u00adter the dis\u00adtance be\u00adtween them. An ex\u00adam\u00adple oc\u00adcurs when cer\u00adtain par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles de\u00adcay, or break up, in\u00adto two pho\u00adtons\u2014par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles of light. These fly off in op\u00adpo\u00adsite di\u00adrec\u00adtions and have the same po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion, or amount by which the wave is tilted in space. De\u00adtec\u00adtors called po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders can meas\u00adure this at\u00adtrib\u00adute. Po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are like ti\u00adny fences with slits. If the slits are tilted the same way as the wave, it goes through; if op\u00adpo\u00adsitely, it does\u00adn\u2019t; if some\u00adwhere in be\u00adtween, it may or may not pass. If you meas\u00adure the two op\u00adpo\u00adsitely-flying pho\u00adtons with po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders tilted the same way, you get the same re\u00adsult for both. But if one of the po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders is tilted a bit, you will get oc\u00adca\u00adsion\u00adal dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults. What if you al\u00adso tilt the sec\u00adond po\u00adlar\u00adizer by the same amount, but the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way? You might get twice as many dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments, Bell rea\u00adsoned. But you might al\u00adso get less than that, be\u00adcause some po\u00adten\u00adtial dis\u00adagree\u00adments could can\u00adcel each oth\u00ader out. For ex\u00adam\u00adple: two pho\u00adtons might be blocked where\u00adas orig\u00adi\u00adnal\u00adly they both would have pas\u00adsed, so two de\u00advi\u00ada\u00adtions from the orig\u00adi\u00adnal re\u00adsult lead to an agree\u00adment. All this fol\u00adlows from log\u00adic. It al\u00adso de\u00adpends on cer\u00adtain rea\u00adson\u00ada\u00adble as\u00adsump\u00adtions, in\u00adclud\u00ading that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles have a real po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion wheth\u00ader it\u2019s meas\u00adured or not. But Bell, in an ar\u00adgu\u00adment known as Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, showed that quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics pre\u00addicts anoth\u00ader out\u00adcome, im\u00adply\u00ading this \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d as\u00adsump\u00adtion might be wrong. Quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics claims that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults when both po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are op\u00adpo\u00adsitely tilt\u00aded\u2014com\u00adpared to one be\u00ading tilt\u00aded\u2014can be more than twice as many. And ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have borne this out. The rea\u00adsons why have to do with yet anoth\u00ader odd pre\u00addic\u00adtion of quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics. Once you de\u00adtect the pho\u00adton as ei\u00adther hav\u00ading crossed the po\u00adlar\u00adizer or not, then it\u2019s ei\u00adther po\u00adlar\u00adized ex\u00adact\u00adly in the di\u00adrec\u00adtion of the in\u00adstru\u00adment, or the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way, re\u00adspec\u00adtive\u00adly. It can\u2019t be po\u00adlar\u00adized at any oth\u00ader an\u00adgle. And its \u201ctwin\u201d must be iden\u00adti\u00adcal\u00adly po\u00adlar\u00adized. All this puts ad\u00addi\u00adtion\u00adal con\u00ads\u00adt\u00adraints on the sys\u00adtem such that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments can rise com\u00adpared to the \u201clog\u00adical\u201d re\u00adsult. Past ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have con\u00adfirmed the seem\u00adingly non\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal out\u00adcome. Yet this alone this does\u00adn\u2019t dis\u00adprove the \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d hy\u00adpoth\u00ade\u00adsis, re\u00adsearch\u00aders say. There\u2019s one oth\u00ader pos\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty, which is that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles are some\u00adhow in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adously com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adcat\u00ading, like telepaths. The new experiment The new ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adment was de\u00adsigned to side\u00adstep this loop\u00adhole: it was set up so that even al\u00adlow\u00ading for in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adous com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtion could\u00adn\u2019t ex\u00adplain the \u201cnon\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal\u201d out\u00adcome, at least not eas\u00adi\u00adly. One would al\u00adso have to drop the no\u00adtion that pho\u00adtons have a def\u00adi\u00adnite po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion in\u00adde\u00adpend\u00adent of any meas\u00adurement. The work, by Si\u00admon Groe\u00adblacher and col\u00adleagues … Continue reading Is Reality a misunderstanding? →\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"James W. Breckenridge\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"James W. Breckenridge\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"James W. Breckenridge\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"James W. Breckenridge\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730\"},\"headline\":\"Is Reality a misunderstanding?\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403\"},\"wordCount\":2054,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/farm2.static.flickr.com\\\/1322\\\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Hmmm\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-CA\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403\",\"name\":\"Is Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/farm2.static.flickr.com\\\/1322\\\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-CA\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-CA\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/farm2.static.flickr.com\\\/1322\\\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/farm2.static.flickr.com\\\/1322\\\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?p=403#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Is Reality a misunderstanding?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/\",\"name\":\"James W. Breckenridge\",\"description\":\"Advocate for the Homeless in Abbotsford, BC\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-CA\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730\",\"name\":\"James W. Breckenridge\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-CA\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"James W. Breckenridge\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Is Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Is Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge","og_description":"April 29, 2007Special to World Science Sev\u00ader\u00adal phys\u00adi\u00adcists say they\u2019ve con\u00adfirmed strange pre\u00addic\u00adtions of mod\u00adern phys\u00adics that clash with our most bas\u00adic no\u00adtions of real\u00adi\u00adty and even sug\u00adgest\u2014some sci\u00aden\u00adtists and phi\u00adloso\u00adphers say\u2014that real\u00adi\u00adty is\u00adn\u2019t there when we\u2019re not look\u00ading. The pre\u00addic\u00adtions have lurked with\u00adin quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics, the sci\u00adence of the small\u00adest things, since the field emerged in the 1920s; but not all phys\u00adi\u00adcists ac\u00adcept\u00aded them. They were un\u00addis\u00adput\u00adedly con\u00adsist\u00adent with ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments, but ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments might not re\u00adveal eve\u00adry\u00adthing. New tests\u2014de\u00adsigned more specif\u00adi\u00adcally than be\u00adfore to probe the real\u00adi\u00adty ques\u00adtion\u2014have yielded un\u00adset\u00adtling re\u00adsults, say re\u00adsearch\u00aders who pub\u00adlished the find\u00adings in the April 19 is\u00adsue of the re\u00adsearch jour\u00adnal Na\u00adture. One of their col\u00adleagues called the find\u00adings in\u00adtri\u00adguing but in\u00adcon\u00adclu\u00adsive. The background Quan\u00adtum phys\u00adi\u00adcists have long not\u00aded that sub\u00ada\u00adtom\u00adic par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles seem to move ran\u00addom\u00adly. For in\u00adstance, one can meas\u00adure a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle\u2019s lo\u00adca\u00adtion at a giv\u00aden mo\u00adment, but can\u2019t know ex\u00adact\u00adly where it would be just be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists de\u00adter\u00admined that the ran\u00addom\u00adness was\u00adn\u2019t just an ap\u00adpear\u00adance due to our ig\u00adno\u00adrance of the de\u00adtails of the mo\u00adtion, but an in\u00ades\u00adcap\u00ada\u00adble prop\u00ader\u00adty of the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles them\u00adselves. Rath\u00ader per\u00adsua\u00adsive ev\u00adi\u00addence for this lay in math. Par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles, for rea\u00adsons no one quite knows, some\u00adtimes act like waves. When they come to\u00adgeth\u00ader, they cre\u00adate the same types of com\u00adplex pat\u00adterns that ap\u00adpear when wa\u00adter rip\u00adples from dif\u00adfer\u00adent di\u00adrec\u00adtions over\u00adlap. But a par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle, be\u00ading at least some\u00adwhat con\u00adfined in space, nor\u00admal\u00adly acts on\u00adly as a small \u201cwave pack\u00adet\u201d\u2014a clus\u00adter of a few rip\u00adples in suc\u00adces\u00adsion\u2014un\u00adlike fa\u00admil\u00adiar waves, in which doz\u00adens or thou\u00adsands pa\u00adrade along. It turns out there is a math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal way to rep\u00adre\u00adsent a wave pack\u00adet; but you must start by rep\u00adre\u00adsenting an in\u00adfi\u00adnite\u00adly re\u00adpeat\u00ading wave, which is a sim\u00adpler for\u00admu\u00adla. Adding up many such de\u00adpic\u00adtions, if you choose them prop\u00ader\u00adly, gives the packet. Yet there\u2019s a catch: each of these com\u00adpo\u00adnents must have a slight\u00adly dif\u00adfer\u00adent wave speed. Thus, the com\u00adplete pack\u00adet has no clear-cut speed. Nor, con\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly, does the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle. The previous experiments Pre\u00adcise\u00adly in line with such math, ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments find that par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle speed is some\u00adwhat ran\u00addom, though the ran\u00addom\u00adness fol\u00adlows rules that again mir\u00adror the equa\u00adtions. When you meas\u00adure speed, you do get a num\u00adber, but that won\u2019t tell you the speed a mo\u00adment be\u00adfore or af\u00adter. In es\u00adsence, phys\u00adi\u00adcists con\u00adclud\u00aded, the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle has no de\u00adfined ve\u00adloc\u00adi\u00adty un\u00adtil you meas\u00adure it. Si\u00adm\u00adi\u00adlar con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions turned out to hold for its lo\u00adca\u00adtion, spin and oth\u00ader prop\u00ader\u00adties. The im\u00adpli\u00adca\u00adtions were huge: the ran\u00addom\u00adness im\u00adplied that key prop\u00ader\u00adties of these ob\u00adjects, per\u00adhaps the ob\u00adjects them\u00adselves, might not ex\u00adist un\u00adless we are watch\u00ading. \u201cNo el\u00ade\u00admen\u00adta\u00adry phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon is a phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon un\u00adtil it is an ob\u00adserved phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon,\u201d the cel\u00ade\u00adbrat\u00aded Prince\u00adton Uni\u00adver\u00adsi\u00adty phys\u00adi\u00adcist John Wheel\u00ader put it. Still, human-made math\u00ade\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal mod\u00adels don\u2019t nec\u00ades\u00adsar\u00adi\u00adly re\u00adflect ul\u00adti\u00admate truth, even if they do match ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00admen\u00adtal re\u00adsults bril\u00adliant\u00adly. And those tests them\u00adselves might miss some\u00adthing. Sci\u00aden\u00adtists in\u00adclud\u00ading Ein\u00adstein balked at the ran\u00addom\u00adness idea\u2014\u201cGod does not play dice,\u201d he fa\u00admous\u00adly fumed\u2014and the con\u00adse\u00adquent col\u00adlapse of cher\u00adished as\u00adsump\u00adtions. The great phys\u00adi\u00adcist joined oth\u00aders in pro\u00adpos\u00ading that there ex\u00adist some yet-unknown fac\u00adtors, or \u201chid\u00adden vari\u00adables,\u201d that in\u00adflu\u00adence par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle prop\u00ader\u00adties, mak\u00ading these look ran\u00addom with\u00adout tru\u00adly be\u00ading so. Phys\u00adi\u00adcists in due course de\u00adsigned ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments to test for hid\u00adden vari\u00adables. In 1964 John Bell de\u00advised such a test. He ex\u00adploited a cu\u00adri\u00adous phe\u00adnom\u00ade\u00adnon called \u201cen\u00adtan\u00adgle\u00adment,\u201d in which know\u00ading some\u00adthing about one par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcle some\u00adtimes tells you a cor\u00adre\u00adspond\u00ading prop\u00ader\u00adty of anoth\u00ader, no mat\u00adter the dis\u00adtance be\u00adtween them. An ex\u00adam\u00adple oc\u00adcurs when cer\u00adtain par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles de\u00adcay, or break up, in\u00adto two pho\u00adtons\u2014par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles of light. These fly off in op\u00adpo\u00adsite di\u00adrec\u00adtions and have the same po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion, or amount by which the wave is tilted in space. De\u00adtec\u00adtors called po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders can meas\u00adure this at\u00adtrib\u00adute. Po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are like ti\u00adny fences with slits. If the slits are tilted the same way as the wave, it goes through; if op\u00adpo\u00adsitely, it does\u00adn\u2019t; if some\u00adwhere in be\u00adtween, it may or may not pass. If you meas\u00adure the two op\u00adpo\u00adsitely-flying pho\u00adtons with po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders tilted the same way, you get the same re\u00adsult for both. But if one of the po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders is tilted a bit, you will get oc\u00adca\u00adsion\u00adal dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults. What if you al\u00adso tilt the sec\u00adond po\u00adlar\u00adizer by the same amount, but the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way? You might get twice as many dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments, Bell rea\u00adsoned. But you might al\u00adso get less than that, be\u00adcause some po\u00adten\u00adtial dis\u00adagree\u00adments could can\u00adcel each oth\u00ader out. For ex\u00adam\u00adple: two pho\u00adtons might be blocked where\u00adas orig\u00adi\u00adnal\u00adly they both would have pas\u00adsed, so two de\u00advi\u00ada\u00adtions from the orig\u00adi\u00adnal re\u00adsult lead to an agree\u00adment. All this fol\u00adlows from log\u00adic. It al\u00adso de\u00adpends on cer\u00adtain rea\u00adson\u00ada\u00adble as\u00adsump\u00adtions, in\u00adclud\u00ading that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles have a real po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion wheth\u00ader it\u2019s meas\u00adured or not. But Bell, in an ar\u00adgu\u00adment known as Bell\u2019s The\u00ado\u00adrem, showed that quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics pre\u00addicts anoth\u00ader out\u00adcome, im\u00adply\u00ading this \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d as\u00adsump\u00adtion might be wrong. Quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics claims that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments be\u00adtween the re\u00adsults when both po\u00adlar\u00adiz\u00aders are op\u00adpo\u00adsitely tilt\u00aded\u2014com\u00adpared to one be\u00ading tilt\u00aded\u2014can be more than twice as many. And ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have borne this out. The rea\u00adsons why have to do with yet anoth\u00ader odd pre\u00addic\u00adtion of quan\u00adtum me\u00adchan\u00adics. Once you de\u00adtect the pho\u00adton as ei\u00adther hav\u00ading crossed the po\u00adlar\u00adizer or not, then it\u2019s ei\u00adther po\u00adlar\u00adized ex\u00adact\u00adly in the di\u00adrec\u00adtion of the in\u00adstru\u00adment, or the op\u00adpo\u00adsite way, re\u00adspec\u00adtive\u00adly. It can\u2019t be po\u00adlar\u00adized at any oth\u00ader an\u00adgle. And its \u201ctwin\u201d must be iden\u00adti\u00adcal\u00adly po\u00adlar\u00adized. All this puts ad\u00addi\u00adtion\u00adal con\u00ads\u00adt\u00adraints on the sys\u00adtem such that the num\u00adber of dis\u00ada\u00adgree\u00adments can rise com\u00adpared to the \u201clog\u00adical\u201d re\u00adsult. Past ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adments have con\u00adfirmed the seem\u00adingly non\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal out\u00adcome. Yet this alone this does\u00adn\u2019t dis\u00adprove the \u201creal\u00adi\u00adty\u201d hy\u00adpoth\u00ade\u00adsis, re\u00adsearch\u00aders say. There\u2019s one oth\u00ader pos\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty, which is that the par\u00adt\u00adi\u00adcles are some\u00adhow in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adously com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adcat\u00ading, like telepaths. The new experiment The new ex\u00adpe\u00adri\u00adment was de\u00adsigned to side\u00adstep this loop\u00adhole: it was set up so that even al\u00adlow\u00ading for in\u00adstan\u00adta\u00adne\u00adous com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtion could\u00adn\u2019t ex\u00adplain the \u201cnon\u00adsen\u00adsi\u00adcal\u201d out\u00adcome, at least not eas\u00adi\u00adly. One would al\u00adso have to drop the no\u00adtion that pho\u00adtons have a def\u00adi\u00adnite po\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adza\u00adtion in\u00adde\u00adpend\u00adent of any meas\u00adurement. The work, by Si\u00admon Groe\u00adblacher and col\u00adleagues … Continue reading Is Reality a misunderstanding? →","og_url":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403","og_site_name":"James W. Breckenridge","article_published_time":"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"James W. Breckenridge","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"James W. Breckenridge","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403"},"author":{"name":"James W. Breckenridge","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/#\/schema\/person\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730"},"headline":"Is Reality a misunderstanding?","datePublished":"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00","dateModified":"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403"},"wordCount":2054,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg","articleSection":["Hmmm"],"inLanguage":"en-CA","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403","url":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403","name":"Is Reality a misunderstanding? - James W. Breckenridge","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg","datePublished":"2007-08-05T03:08:00+00:00","dateModified":"2008-10-26T06:37:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/#\/schema\/person\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-CA","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-CA","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#primaryimage","url":"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg","contentUrl":"http:\/\/farm2.static.flickr.com\/1322\/1012777433_447c5e32b6_o.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?p=403#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Is Reality a misunderstanding?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/","name":"James W. Breckenridge","description":"Advocate for the Homeless in Abbotsford, BC","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-CA"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/#\/schema\/person\/5e8aac012477fbd6782de6641b564730","name":"James W. Breckenridge","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-CA","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ff6c8deb98ae4c6bdac84466bb69fa996132849ab712df7ee59522caf3872c10?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"James W. Breckenridge"},"url":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=403"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":748,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403\/revisions\/748"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jameswbreckenridge.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}