Ангорский Андрей Андреевич : другие произведения.

Комментарии: Двухщелевой опыт (эксперимент): философские и физические интерпретации
 ()

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
  • © Copyright Ангорский Андрей Андреевич
  • Размещен: 14/08/2024, изменен: 15/08/2024. 9k. Статистика.
  • Статья: Естествознание
  • Аннотация:
    Беглый анализ проблематики одного из самых известных опытов квантовой физики - "эксперимента с двумя щелями". Его общий разбор, выяснение "роли наблюдателя", философский и естественнонаучный анализ.
    		• ОБСУЖДЕНИЯ: Естествознание (последние)
    17:02 Матвеев Н.И. "О Двигателе Для Космических " (2/1)
    11:22 Lem A. "Магнитная теория гравитации" (37/2)
    10:35 Березина Е.Л. "Как-то юнга Дудочкин бросил " (8/1)
    10:29 Ролько Т., Юрцва "Трансформации электрона и " (298)
    Добавить комментарий Отсортировано по:[убыванию][возрастанию]
    ОБЩИЕ ГОСТЕВЫЕ:
    18:05 "Форум: Трибуна люду" (282/67)
    18:05 "Форум: все за 12 часов" (330/101)
    18:00 "Диалоги о Творчестве" (306/15)
    17:55 "Технические вопросы "Самиздата"" (245/7)
    25/11 "Форум: Литературные объявления" (666)
    25/11 "О блокировании "Самиздата"" (294)
    ОБСУЖДАЕМ: Ангорский А.А.
    01:48 "О жизни и физическом времени" (3/1)
    03/09 "Концепция общего" (3)
    27/08 "Хайяматсу" (1)
    22/08 "Afternet. Этапы развития Internet'a" (3)
    22/08 "Двухщелевой опыт (эксперимент): " (2)
    13/08 "Почему четыре?" (5)
    07/08 "Моделирование темпорологических " (7)
    04/08 "Три постулата темпорологии" (66)
    18/07 "Эссе по комментариям. Метапознание" (4)
    09/11 "В чём сила математики, и что " (6)
    08/11 "Time Test 1" (1)
    23/06 "Ссылки на статьи, опубликованные " (10)
    17/06 "Формирование Единой Идейной " (9)
    27/05 "Implication, или о теории " (1)
    16/04 "Примечание к статье "о структуре " (2)
    11/04 "Язык логики возможности" (6)
    01/04 "О структуре пространства-времени" (7)
    02/02 "Критерии" (4)
    26/01 "How to find Higgs boson in " (4)
    10/12 "Implication (продолжение)" (1)
    28/09 "Как обнаружить бозон Хиггса " (3)
    06/09 "О Гносеологических Основах " (29)
    04/09 "Машина времени. Или про временное " (2)
    02/02 "Имею задать вопрос" (3)
    24/02 "Симметричные преобразования " (4)
    11/10 "Как Эйнштейн придумал С Т " (1)
    02/08 "След" (10)
    29/11 "Определения" (5)
    ОБСУЖДЕНИЯ: (все обсуждения) (последние)
    18:05 Козлов И.В. "Коллективный сборник лирической " (66/36)
    18:04 Коркханн "Лабиринты эволюции" (12/11)
    18:04 Седрик "Список фанфиков с моими комментариями" (401/15)
    18:04 Буденкова Т.П. "Альбиция шелковая" (14/1)
    18:03 Васильева Т.Н. "Конкурсы 2024 года. Анонс. " (17/1)
    18:02 Давыдов С.А. "То, что я читаю и смотрю" (954/10)
    18:00 Модератор-2 "Диалоги о Творчестве" (306/15)
    18:00 Кротов С.В. "Чаганов: Война. Часть 4" (345/21)
    17:59 Буревой А. "Чего бы почитать?" (888/4)
    17:59 Алекс 6. "Параллель 2" (543/9)
    17:57 Родин Д.М. "Князь Барбашин 3" (888/28)
    17:56 Серый А. "Резонанс: О Тенях и Цветах" (2/1)
    17:51 Бояндин К.Ю. "Форма и содержание (2024-12-" (584/7)
    17:49 Гончарова Г.Д. "Устинья, дочь боярская - 1. " (184/9)
    17:49 Рыжов О. "Фельдфебель" (1)
    17:45 Винокур Р. "Похолодает ближе к декабрю" (4/3)
    17:43 Кулаков А.И. "Прода" (359/2)
    17:39 Седой Г. "Телохранитель - 3. Новый дом. " (2/1)
    17:37 Калинин А.А. "Фантазии и Фанфики" (9/1)
    17:35 Шибаев Ю.В. "И вот опять..." (5/4)

    РУЛЕТКА:
    Мир Карика. Первый
    Ван Лав. Держи меня
    Мы были здесь счастливы
    Рекомендует Сергеева М.

    ВСЕГО В ЖУРНАЛЕ:
     Авторов: 108525
     Произведений: 1671561

    Список известности России

    СМ. ТАКЖЕ:
    Заграница.lib.ru     | Интервью СИ
    Музыка.lib.ru | Туризм.lib.ru
    Художники | Звезды Самиздата
    ArtOfWar | Okopka.ru
    Фильм про "Самиздат"
    Уровень Шума:
    Интервью про "Самиздат"

    НАШИ КОНКУРСЫ:
    Рождественский детектив-24


    02/12 ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕМ:
     Бабкин А.Ю.
     Бойкова А.
     Брюн
     Бэйба К.
     Варлаков Г.
     Волкова И.В.
     Воронцова М.С.
     Гаджиева Л.
     Галкин Г.С.
     Гамаюн А.Ю.
     Герман С.Э.
     Гинзбург М.
     Глэм Т.
     Граб А.
     Грачушник Н.М.
     Давыдов В.
     Дикка
     Дубровин А.А.
     Жалнина Н.
     Золотая Л.
     Ильясова Л.Т.
     Катрейн
     Класов И.Д.
     Климов Д.С.
     Колючий О.
     Кос
     Криворогова И.Р.
     Кудинова А.И.
     Куклинов Н.В.
     Майн Ю.М.
     Малаев А.Е.
     Милославская К.
     Милославская С.
     Мячин С.А.
     Невер А.
     Неярова А.
     Овчинникова Е.П.
     Орлов Р.А.
     Ошка Э.
     Петрова И.Б.
     Попов М.С.
     Рассоха Г.С.
     Рассоха Г.С.
     Рыбаков А.О.
     Саба С.
     Санин Е.
     Сибиданов Б.Б.
     Синдарион
     Скворцов Б.В.
     Сугралинов Д.С.
     Сутугин А.Н.
     Ткаченко Т.В.
     Токунов А.
     Халов Н.А.
     Хеллер Я.
     Хомякstory
     Храмов В.А.
     Цацин С.Т.
     Чебан И.П.
     Чиненков А.В.
     Шаманов С.
     Шулепова М.К.
     Delia
     Kobold
     Netta S.
     Sanote
     Snowfox О.
     Tassa O.
     Whispa В.
    ПОСЛЕДНИЕ ПОСТУПЛЕНИЯ: (7day) (30day) (Рассылка)
    12:56 Серый А. "Резонанс: О Тенях и Цветах"
    10:51 Шкин А.М. "Девять клинков Гекаты 3"
    07:09 Герасимов А.С. "На кончике хвоста в цвете "
    01/12 Piaf "Возникновение"
    01/12 Манчев В.С. "Царичина (1 часть)"
    17:22 Шаповал Н.И. "Сборник стихов"
    30/11 Неизвестный А.Ф. "Книга третья.Часть вторая"
    30/11 Бирюк В. "Зверь лютый. Книга 5. Парикмахерия"
    28/11 Иевлев Г.В. "В плену горячей звезды"
    2. Angorsky 2024/08/22 06:33 [ответить]
      http://samlib.ru/a/angorskij_a_a/_2.jpg.shtml https://archive.is/qYcJ3 https://web.archive.org/web/20240817145447/http://samlib.ru/a/angorskij_a_a/tt2.shtml Интересный ряды получаются! )) Вот, например, суммы членов рядов от 0 до бесконечности n^e/e^n ~ 4.266059 -> или n^2/2^n = 6. Уравнение с приравненными здесь числителем и знаменателем имеет два корня: 2 и 4. Для ряда же n^3/3^n = 4.125. А (1/2)^n/n^(1/2) ~ 0.806126 ... Как-то так...
    1. *Ангорский Андрей Андреевич 2024/08/17 01:38 [ответить]
      Concept: initially the substantial part of the experiment was planned to be considered in a narrower sense - from the position of the article 'On the structure of space-time', but after a little thinking about it, I came to the conclusion that it is more correct and useful to take 'Life' as a basis. Concretization of details and various aspects of this experiment and related phenomena is already a matter of rather simple technique and a large volume of work.
      The mentioned concept looks quite appropriate if to pay attention to similarity of approaches and even (to some extent) terminologies of quantum physics and Possibility Theory (about PT in my section it is written quite a lot). For example, even basic concepts of Possibility and Probability (see Probability in quantum physics) look similar in something. And the 'uncertainty principle' of quantum theory is 'vagueness' in the interpretation of Possibility Theory (PT). But it is important to realize that PT itself is more general (and extensive, respectively). This is what caused the above mentioned approach to the consideration of the two-slit experiment.
      
      But there is one more thing - in this kind of cognitive dilemmas it is necessary (we repeat again) to go from the general to the particular. Since - formally - there are many aspects of the analyzed phenomenon. The notion of time accepted in modern physics is ONLY ONE OF THEM (let me remind you from PT: time is just one of the parameters of the mediating medium). Scientists, confused in their interpretations, had to investigate even the concept of CONSCIOUSNESS (at some stage - to explain the relationship between an event and its observability). This, however, did not help much. Formally separating in our language model (it is forced - this is the model) different aspects of the discussed experience (like, for example, discussion of 'temporal' and, let's say, 'conscious' - see a bit above) and its basic concepts, I will try further without formulas and geometrically complex constructions (thanks to PT, which allows us to escape from such kind of concretizations) to state my point of view on the Experiment with two slits.
      
      
      Mythologization of peeping in the slits
      
      
      Let's briefly familiarize ourselves, to begin with, with the essence of the experiment discussed here. For those who are too lazy to look for information, I'll give you this link. It is not the shortest and easiest to understand article. But it is quite comprehensive on the whole range of issues involved.
      
      If you are already familiar with the issue or have read the above article (and perhaps other materials on this subject), you can move on.
      
      At once we should pay attention to the fact that not every laboratory is capable of reproducing the experiment in its entirety - with modeling of the 'observer's influence'. In 'home conditions' initially put (like my experiment with Higgs boson). It is quite easy to get an interference pattern at home - on the wall. But to detect the famous observer effect - no, not so easy. And in this connection a number of questions arise to the organization of such experiments, to their 'purity' and orientation to a certain result. And this remark should not be left out.
      
      Further, if we assume that in a good quality experiment we still get the 'observer effect' (the dependence of the observation result on whether the course of the experiment itself is observed or not), then it is necessary to analyze the question of purity (or clarity (fuzziness) - as in Possibility Theory) of this effect. To what extent the results of the experiment testify unequivocally to the influence of the fact of observation on the result obtained. And here, with a very high probability, everything is not so definite. For a number of reasons. First, the mediating environment is not a clearly segmented 'space of experience'. It is impossible to separate the observer from the experiment in practice. Such a separation is a mental assumption. Here it is a question of the 'clarity' of the observer (its boundaries) and the experiment. Second, as a consequence, a similar consideration arises about the representation (and in general - the concept) of the RESULT of experience. It would be more appropriate to describe it according to the gradational principle (see 'Life'), rather than in a strictly deterministic way: if the probabilistic approach of quantum physics is to be retained, then so is this one.
      
      In general, as it seems, cognitive dissonance arises exactly at the junction of old concepts and new paradigm - application of the former within the framework of the latter causes a lot of contradictions. 'Passing through the left slit' or 'passing through the right slit' is a poor description of the RESULT of experience within the new quantum paradigm. This applies equally to other 'results'. Take the final picture 'on the wall'. Look again at the reasoning about being-non-existence in the 'Life' article. Is the absence of certain stripes exactly their non-existence? Or is their actualization insufficient for detection (the probability of detection is close to zero, but not zero)? Conversely: is it accurate to say that the presence of certain bands is their ONE (and eternal, undeniable) existence? Without gradations, relativity, halftones? The most simplified representation is a kind of (Potential!) Dirac sea for the above mentioned bands. But the simplification here is too obvious and hard to stand up to criticism. So is the Higgs ocean. It can be used only as a first illustrative approximation.
      
      But let's come at it from a slightly different angle. In quantum physics there is an uncertainty principle: the more is known about the position of a particle, the less is known about its velocity (DIRECTION). This is a very interpretation-rich principle. Here we can again mention the article 'On the structure of space-time' - more precisely, look there about the temporal geometrization of the microcosm. And about temporal 'stitching' of the microcosm and macrocosm. Relativity of mediation is not only in 'space', but also in 'time'. Therefore, conventionally, a particle under study can 'move' in the opposite direction relative to 'our-observer time'. And 'clear fixation' of it (clear fixation - certainly, only by our mind, as attention is a limited resource, its concentration on one thing leaves other things out of perception) by some parameter (here - 'space') leaves a lot of potential possibilities for other parameters. A classic PT article (in terms of the 'law of conservation of mediation') illustrates this very idea.
      
      The above considerations - not all of which are presented here - show the complexity and multifaceted nature of our world. As well as the complexity of its mastering and comprehension by us (do we?). Besides classical experiment they - these reasonings - are quite applicable to the analysis of phenomena, for example, related to 'quantum entanglement'. And many others. But it should be taken into account that those interpretations, which are known to us, are mainly generated by the Western scientific community. With all its disadvantages and advantages. In my opinion, one of the significant disadvantages of the current science is fragmentation, loss of special abilities to generalize and reverse movement - from the general to the particular. This deprives it of reliance on a serious worldview base. And, as a consequence, it leads to frank fantasy mirages, confusion (and not quantum any more), virtualization, primitivism and wandering without stable signs of choice of variants of movement correlated with own nature.
      
      And this is what contributed, paradoxically enough, to the writing of this article. After all, the media started talking about another - quite unexpected for the world of sober science - interpretation of the experiment with two slits: the idea is almost entirely based on the Hollywood movie 'The Matrix'. And now a lot of effort and money will be spent somewhere in California to study the question: are we not living in a simulation of reality?
      
      Whether or not it will be possible to 'prove' something here in the course of any experiments - I will leave it to the reader to answer this question. But for me, the partiality (read in the sense of using the term 'gradation') of 'simulation' as well as 'reality' are quite obvious things.
      IT'S SIMPLE, BUT IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS YOU THINK.
      ''

    Связаться с программистом сайта.

    Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
    О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

    Как попасть в этoт список

    Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"