The measurement problem and particles as sinks

v. 2 n. 6

The Measurement Problem. Johan Hansson writes: "In the strange world of electrons, photons and other fundamental particles quantum mechanics is law. Particles do not behave like little bullets, but as waves spread over a large region. Each particle is described by a wave function that tells what its location, speed and other characteristics are more likely to be, but not what these properties are. The particle instead has countless opportunities for each, until one experimentally measures one of them - location, for example - then the particle wave function “collapses” and, apparently at random, a single well-defined position is observed. But how and why does a measurement on a particle make its wave function collapse, which in turn produces the concrete reality we perceive? This issue, the Measurement Problem in quantum physics [3], may seem esoteric, but our understanding of what reality is, or if it even exists, depends on the answer. Even worse: according to quantum physics it should be impossible to ever get a certain value for anything. It is characteristic of quantum physics that many different states coexist. The problem is that quantum mechanics is supposed to be universal, that is, should apply regardless of the size of the things we describe. Why then do we not see ghostly superpositions of objects even at our level? This problem is still unsolved. When can something be said to have happened at all? Without additional assumptions beyond quantum physics, nothing can ever happen! This is because the wave function mathematically is described by so-called linear equations, where states that have ever coexisted will do so forever. Despite this, we know that specific outcomes are entirely possible, and moreover happen all the time. Another strange thing is that the uncertainty in quantum physics arises only in the measurement. Before that, quantum mechanics is just as deterministic as classical physics, or even more so, because it is exactly linear and thus “simple”. Only when we understand how our objective macroscopic world arises from the ghostly microscopic world, where everything that is not strictly forbidden is compulsory, can we say that we truly know how nature really works." *?

Particles as gravitational sinks instead of sources has been introduced.** If an elementary particle is a sink, the gravitational field associated with it originates in space near and far, focuses at an infinitesimal point and cancels, so that the field might be said to exist everywhere except where it would conventionally be located. As mentioned such a particle would not require renormalization nor result in excess calculated mass of the quantum vacuum, and would be testable in principle. Like a pothole in the pavement, it may be felt and real because of a discontinuity in the medium.

This characterization of particle indicates ever-presence, being derived from all of space; the particle is everywhere except where it is perceived to be when measured. This behavior is exemplified within the atom, where the electron is conventionally said not to exist between quantum jumps. The particle is a focal point, discontinuity, not a physical thing. Its mass/energy is everywhere else except in the energy level it is apparently filling, as the absence of light is the negative of the positive photograph -- yet is the basis of the picture, as the picture follows the negative film stock; see cover image.

This focal point is not a wavefunction, probability nor superposition. This focal point is an absence of the background instead of a presence superimposed on the background. Such a particle is not conveniently calculable, but it may help explain why it is only calculable as a probability. Just knowing its physical nature may complement the probability interpretation and indicate what is physically happening behind the calculations, helping to ground quantum mechanics for more confidence in the calculations as a roundabout way of describing actual physical reality. That physical reality might be more pointedly described as an absence of physicality could be as unsettling as probabilities. Although, the primacy of space, or gravity, is suggested, the point absence of which is the particle.

______

* --?Johan Hansson? Division of Physics Lule?a University of Technology SE-971 87 Lule?a, Sweden?

** Particles as sinks instead of sources (booklet) | LinkedIn