Purifying Physics: The Quest to Explain Why the “Quantum” Exists

Well, one bit is simply not enough. In order to know that you have one bit, you must have another bit to compare it with. Then you need a third bit to do that comparison, and so the smallest amount of information is still three bits.

Enough for what? If you think about it, to even detect that a "bit" exists within an observation (message), much less determine its value, one must know, a priori, how to do the detection. So yes, it is necessary to compare the bit, but it must be compared to bits already in the receiver's possession (a priori) rather than part of the received message that contained the "bit". Perform the following thought experiment: If an observable only contained one bit of (recoverable) information (as opposed to data) what type of behavior would be observed?

Rob McEachern

One bit is not enough for prediction of action for an object. All information in the universe exists for the purpose of prediction and one bit is simply not enough for a minimal packet of information.

You are very correct that there is a whole universe that exists besides that one bit. The purpose that you described was a measurement and you stated that one bit of information is the smallest amount of information. But that is simply not true.

A received message may have one bit, but that measurement requires a bit for comparison and a bit for transmission to make any sense. I believe that prediction of action is the reason that we measure and the minimum information packet needed for any prediction is still three bits.

Suppose a bit means "stop" and you receive a stop bit and stop. I know that one bit means stop, I measure one bit, and then I take an action to stop. Three bits. Although there are all kinds of singular realities that we imagine do not depend on other things, the closure of our universe means that information packets for prediction are at least three bits. All predictions involve matter, time, and action.

Suppose a bit means null or no action. The same math seems to apply. It is not that a single bit has no purpose, but rather that a single bit still needs a context to result in a useful prediction of action. That context is at least three bits.

You have confused what you, the receiver does (such as stop), based on a priori knowledge, with what the observed entity is doing, which has no knowledge of what you will do. How did you know that a bit means "stop", or "null", except by consulting your interval behavioral states? That has nothing to do with the information content of the observable.

As you said "a single bit still needs a context to result in a useful prediction of action", but that context exists entirely within the receiver of a message, not the message itself.

Rob McEachern

In my essay of the essay contest, I presented metaphysical reasons to consider the main "paradoxes" of quantum physics as actually needed to make it possible for the universe to host consciousness.

I also wrote in my site an introduction of quantum physics in the form of a short list of axioms, clarifying the concepts of states and measurement, and thus also the metaphysical aspects. Namely, I start by developing a geometric formulation of the general concept of Markov process, then quantum physics is obtained by a modification in this geometric formulation. Such an approach clarifies the articulation between classical and quantum systems, and thus the understanding of decoherence.

...As you said "a single bit still needs a context to result in a useful prediction of action", but that context exists entirely within the receiver of a message, not the message itself.

...which is another message, and that is my only point. Without the additional message, the one bit message has no meaning.

"Without the additional message, the one bit message has no meaning." i agree. But without the additional message (the content of the receiver's memory), no received message has any meaning, regardless of its length.

Why the quantum? The schroedinger equation represents a wave in a plenum (``space'', ether) . Matter is pushed by the divergence of the plenum (like gravity in GR) to the minimum. The minimums are separated by the wavelength - hence quantum.

Dear Colleagues,

I would argue that the prime difficulty here is that we have completely misunderstood the nature of quantum mechanics. Rather than a theory of all matter on the microscopic level, it provides a mechanism for microscopic fundamental vector fields to self-organize into (spin-quantized) soliton-like domains that act in certain respects as particles. This is where h-bar comes from, and all the other relations follow from this. This leads to a realistic deterministic picture without entanglement or other paradoxes, and without any boundary between quantum and classical worlds. See my FQXi essay for further information. This is a "wave-only" picture that should have been considered in the early days of QM, but evidently was not. And importantly, this predicts sharp differences from standard QM in textbook experiments such as the two-stage Stern-Gerlach experiment. This experiment has never actually been done in the laboratory, but could easily be done using modern atomic beam equipment.

Alan Kadin

Why Quantum? Because reality requires it.

When Max Planck (1858-1947) made the revolutionary insight that the energy emitted by black body radiation is required to be quantized as opposed to continuous, it lead to the development of Quantum Mechanics. Reality requires indeterminacy, retro-causality, entanglement, superposition and any other Quantum phenomenon yet to be discovered.

E=hf

Reality (or energy) is proportional to frequency.

Jose shows ignorance of wave-particle duality.

Have a nice day.

This really needs investigating, why do some systems information, appear to be able to communicate faster than the speed of light? If one compares light speed to information speed, one certainly can easily derive the notion of Einsteins "look into the mirror at light speed..."....then image disappears, likewise there is a quantum point whereby, information disappears. Information loss upon quantum systems invoke a Quantum Catastrophe?

Mirrors Mirrors on the wall...which theory is the fairest dice thrower of them all!

Both Classical and Quantum Physics are embarrassingly fully reliant on erroneous abstractions. Newton was wrong about abstract gravity, Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was completely wrong about the explosive capability of abstract NOTHING. A quantum computer can indeed produce a billion textual references to an abstract toe in 8 seconds, and a quantum computer can reproduce thousands of copies of photographs and graphics of toes of every type. But no quantum computer will ever be built that could produce one real cell of one real toe.

Joe Fisher

Who Ordered That!!

If one orders a small neatly clump of gas in corner of a container, then compared to a later time of haphazard distribution, then one must class this exercise as pre-causal?

A small gas cloud in corner of box is actually looked upon incorrectly?..this sequence is actually a form of "Disorder" as opposed to "Order" of en-tropic flow.

Natural order of even distribution, classed as "disorder"?

2nd Law relies upon observation results, order relative to disorder, over the perception of time, when the event is classed as "now" to when the event is classed as "past"..order increases within systems that are thermo decreased..thus cooling a gas clump down to a liquid state, will enable it to be ordered/forced into the corner, still pre causing the effect of reversibility?

What appears to be order for one observer in one ,moment in time, may be an other observers disorder in an-others relative time?

Between any two points in time, there is but one space. Between any two points in space there is but one time, and this time is clearly NOW!

The quantum realm uses pre_loaded dice! there most certainly is no "now" within QM!

Quantum exists in the extension as we created the concept. It was an useful idea created by Planck and explored by Einstein. It is impressive how one person's ideas can influence all Physics. All Physics is now contaminated by Einstein's views.

Recently Prof. Robitaille published a paper invalidating Kirchoff's Law and by extension, Planck's constant h looses its universality.

In the last 100 years QM comes a long way from quantum creation. I don't think they'll return back to verify any possible mistake.

Theories are models, in Hamiltonian space is possible to mathematically describe various. My point is not invalidate the mathematical model, but its connection with our perception of reality. This is a philosophical question. If a theory is incompatible with our perception, with our capacity to understand the universe in which we live, so this theory is not useful.

Then a question arises and the answer is a choice. There is a fundamental identity between the human mind and the reality in which we live? My choice is Yes. Hence, as consequence of my choice, a fundamental reality can exist. So I can say that human Logic is a expression of existing process in physical reality.

I'm not referring to a person's train of thought, but to a fundamental organic human Logic.

Accepting Logic, the only valid process of knowing the universe becomes deterministic.

The wave function always will collapse in reality. The probability is only expressing what we don't know. Knowing is always a local and deterministic process.

When a mathematical theory Interpretation produces paradoxes, is a clear indication that the Logic was violated.

Let's examine a classical QM experiment, the EPR. We can substitute the particles by balls and the spins by colors, named black and white. The balls are created in pairs, one is black and other is white. We put each ball in one box and separate the 2 boxes for a great distance, 100 light years for instance. We call boxes A and B. One observer open the box A and see the ball inside is black. QM Interpretation states that the information travel instantaneously to box B and the ball "becomes" white!

Is that logical? No. Logic says that the information was already there at the moment the balls were created, so the velocity is zero. As any 5 years old children can understand.

QM superposition Interpretation says until the boxes were open the balls were grey.

Logic says, No. There is no valid superposition of eigenstates. The only valid colors is black Or white.

The only way to entanglement become valid is if a real change in one ball produce a change in the other. Say we change the color of one ball and instantaneously the other color changes.

Transcendental Interpretations violate Logic.

There is a general sensation that QM departed from Logic a long time ago. If QM is not logical anymore, then it is useless.

So, Ginger,

What is your thinking on whether Planck's yet to be rationalized set of equations constituting a distribution theorem, given an equi-partition assumption, is necessarily the physical reality resulting in a fundamental discrete quantity of energy rather than simply being an averaged least observable measure of action?