LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

View Poll Results: Regarding quantum physics:
It makes sense and I believe in it. 8 38.10%
It makes sense, but I don't believe in it. 0 0%
It doesn't make sense, but I believe in it. 4 19.05%
It doesn't make sense and I don't believe in it. 3 14.29%
I don't care, but will vote. 6 28.57%
Voters: 21. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-29-2011, 04:19 AM   #1
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quantum physics poll


I saw a show on TV that prompted me to make this poll. They were talking about quantum physics and they concluded that you have to just accept it and believe in it even if it doesn't make sense to you, because of the all the inventions supposedly impossible without it. So, I want to know what you believe, and whether it makes sense to you, that's all.

Last edited by H_TeXMeX_H; 05-29-2011 at 04:23 AM.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 04:30 AM   #2
catkin
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Servers: Debian Squeeze and Wheezy. Desktop: Slackware64 14.0. Netbook: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 8,551
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
The poll is missing ... ?
 
Old 05-29-2011, 04:41 AM   #3
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,039
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
you have to just accept it and believe in it even if it doesn't make sense to you
That sounds more like a religious attitude than a scientific one, doesn't it?
 
Old 05-29-2011, 04:51 AM   #4
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
That sounds more like a religious attitude than a scientific one, doesn't it?
That's exactly what I thought when I heard what they said. But, they did tell the truth, you do have to believe in it just like in religion, even if it doesn't make sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by catkin View Post
The poll is missing ... ?
It shouldn't be missing, I was able to vote, brianL also voted. It should be visible.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 04:54 AM   #5
Nylex
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: London, UK
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,464

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I never understood quantum mechanics, because it seemed counter-intuitive to me. As such, I avoided it as much as possible during my undergrad degree. If it works, i.e. it describes physical phenomena accurately, then fair enough.

Richard Feynman said, "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics" (there's a citation on Wikiquote).
 
Old 05-29-2011, 05:59 AM   #6
SigTerm
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 379

Rep: Reputation: 233Reputation: 233Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I saw a show on TV that prompted me to make this poll. They were talking about quantum physics and they concluded that you have to just accept it and believe in it even if it doesn't make sense to you, because of the all the inventions supposedly impossible without it. So, I want to know what you believe, and whether it makes sense to you, that's all.
Quantum physics are not relevant to computer programming or my hobbies, so I don't really care. However, as far as I know, there are widely-used technologies based on quantum physics, so the theory must be correct.
Technologies include transistors, lasers, flash memory, MRI scans and so on. You're free to research relation of quantum mechanics/physics to those technologies on your own - there's plenty of material on the web.

P.S. "Believe" or "not believe" is an incorrect attitude, IMO. "Believing" is not important. What's important is whether it works and have practical uses or not. A correct theory doesn't have to "make sense", but as long as it can be used, it is okay.

Last edited by SigTerm; 05-29-2011 at 06:02 AM.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 06:29 AM   #7
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by SigTerm View Post
Quantum physics are not relevant to computer programming or my hobbies, so I don't really care. However, as far as I know, there are widely-used technologies based on quantum physics, so the theory must be correct.
Technologies include transistors, lasers, flash memory, MRI scans and so on. You're free to research relation of quantum mechanics/physics to those technologies on your own - there's plenty of material on the web.

P.S. "Believe" or "not believe" is an incorrect attitude, IMO. "Believing" is not important. What's important is whether it works and have practical uses or not. A correct theory doesn't have to "make sense", but as long as it can be used, it is okay.
You make an incorrect assumption, and no it is not ok. You assume that if the equations work, the theory is correct. This not a logical statement. The equations can work, within limited bounds, but the theory can be wrong, or there can be alternate theories that lead to better equations and make more sense.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 07:13 AM   #8
SigTerm
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 379

Rep: Reputation: 233Reputation: 233Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
You make an incorrect assumption, and no it is not ok. You assume that if the equations work, the theory is correct. This not a logical statement. The equations can work, within limited bounds, but the theory can be wrong, or there can be alternate theories that lead to better equations and make more sense.
I do not assume that if theory works it is completely correct or complete. I assume that if equations work, the theory can be used for practical purposes. I.e. the theory is correct to some extent but may be incomplete. Once you run into situation when equations no longer work, then you'll have to refine the theory or find different theory. As long as the theory produces expected results, it is okay to use it, even if you don't "believe" in it.

In "religion" thread there were a few decent arguments, and on of them (#1313 , by reed9, who also provided an interesting link("The Relativity of Wrong" by Isaac Asimov) to read) said that the job of science is to provide mathematical models for real-world phenomena. If this is correct, then (with exception of mathematics) you'll always be working with theories that may be incomplete, or may not describe behavior of real world in all possible situations. In this case you'll have to use a theory until you run into situation where theory no longer works, and then you'll have to refine or replace the theory. As far as I know, science has been working this way for centuries (if not thousands of years), and this is perfectly fine. As I understand it, quantum physics is just another model of real world - it is not a "knowledge in its final form", and the model may be improved/replaced many times later. As I understand it, it isn't different from software development - based on specifications you build a model and keep improving it until it meets the specification (which may change over the time) and there are no more noticeable bugs.

As I said before, you seem to be thinking in binary mode - it is either "always correct" or "is BS". I'd suggest to read the "Relativity of Wrong" and apply a bit of fuzziness to your thinking. The whole scientific business seems like an iterative development for me - make a theory, run into problem, refine or replace the theory, repeat forever. So I can't understand what's the big deal with you and quantum mechanics - it is not a religious scripture.

Last edited by SigTerm; 05-29-2011 at 07:31 AM.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 07:32 AM   #9
Hangdog42
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,790
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H
You assume that if the equations work, the theory is correct. This not a logical statement. The equations can work, within limited bounds, but the theory can be wrong, or there can be alternate theories that lead to better equations and make more sense.
Then how is quantum theory different from any other theory in science? Gravity isn't well understood yet equations about it have proven useful for a long time.

There is nothing to see here, this is just science doing what science does. So what if quantum theory is difficult/confusing/insane to most people? If it is a valid explanation of the available facts, then it is a valid scientific theory. "Belief" has nothing to do with it.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 07:42 AM   #10
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangdog42 View Post
Then how is quantum theory different from any other theory in science? Gravity isn't well understood yet equations about it have proven useful for a long time.

There is nothing to see here, this is just science doing what science does. So what if quantum theory is difficult/confusing/insane to most people? If it is a valid explanation of the available facts, then it is a valid scientific theory. "Belief" has nothing to do with it.
Gravity may not be understood well, but at least they don't come up with whacky theories about it.

I don't think it is a valid explanation and contradicts with the rest of physics (they admit this themselves).

Anyway, just vote.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 07:44 AM   #11
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,039
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I'm still worried about Schroedinger's cat. How long has it been in that box without food & water now?
 
Old 05-29-2011, 08:18 AM   #12
catkin
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Servers: Debian Squeeze and Wheezy. Desktop: Slackware64 14.0. Netbook: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 8,551
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
It shouldn't be missing, I was able to vote, brianL also voted. It should be visible.
OK now. Glitch? User error?
 
Old 05-29-2011, 08:20 AM   #13
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
I don't know, maybe report it to mods or something.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 08:39 AM   #14
catkin
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Servers: Debian Squeeze and Wheezy. Desktop: Slackware64 14.0. Netbook: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 8,551
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I don't know, maybe report it to mods or something.
Will do if it happens again because there's not much can be done about an issue that cannot be reproduced.
 
Old 05-29-2011, 09:33 AM   #15
Hangdog42
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,790
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H
I don't think it is a valid explanation and contradicts with the rest of physics (they admit this themselves).
So what if it contradicts the rest of physics? It makes valid predictions that can be tested. That means it is a viable scientific theory, just an incomplete one. The contradictions just mean that people don't yet understand the boundaries of quantum physics, which isn't surprising. There are a lot simpler scientific theories that aren't complete. Take gravity again. Scientists have been able to derive equations showing how it works, but the understanding of why it works is still pretty much a mystery. Would you throw out current gravitational theory if the explanation of why it works turns out to be as weird and contradictory as quantum theory?

Or take light? Our current understanding is that it behaves both as a wave and as a particle (and yes, I know this is part of quantum theory). Do we have to make a decision or can we accept that our incomplete understanding of the nature of light means we have to do a little situational thinking?

Now if you have solid, scientific facts that show that quantum theory isn't valid, please put them forward. You'd probably rank up there with the greatest minds in physics if you can completely invalidate quantum physics. However if you just don't "like" it, that puts you in the same camp with non-scientific cranks like the Creationists.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SOLVED] quantum lto 4 hh and linux napata Linux - Hardware 3 05-17-2013 01:46 AM
how to use physics cdrom in Xen? holmes86 Linux - Software 8 03-18-2009 01:06 AM
Quantum computer ronlau9 General 7 05-19-2008 03:29 PM
Poll: (Without the poll) - How is Linux used in your workplace? SlowCoder General 13 09-11-2007 11:03 PM
nVidia Physics? NetRAVEN5000 Linux - Games 8 04-23-2006 10:13 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration