Books To Read Before You Start Mba

Immortality 'Quantum SLIDING DOORS - The Many Worlds Theory

This is a very interesting article, that while dealing with a subject of quantum physics is written in very simple examples to help you understand the topic in smoothly.

E’ difficile immaginare quali potranno essere le conseguenze della nostra comprensione del mondo quantico… direi che queste teorie, supportano in modo interessante alcune tematiche spirituali. la nostra comprensione dell’universo come lo conosciamo viene messa a dura prova… è forse il momento per  un cambiamento di paradigma! Queste informazioni… possono aiutare. Buona lettura

Introduzione al funzionamento del Suicidio Quantico

di Josh Clark
dal sito science.howstuffworks.com
Traduzione di Gianluca Freda  (Parte 1)
tratto da: Link

A man is sitting in front of a gun pointed at his head. It is not an ordinary gun, it is connected to a device that measures the spin of a quantum particle. Each time you press the trigger, the device measures the spin of quantum particles (or quarks). According to the survey, the gun will fire a bullet or not. If the spin of the quantum particle is measured in a clockwise direction, the gun will fire. If the spin of the quarks is counterclockwise, the gun will fire. There will be only a click.

Nervously, the man takes a deep breath and pulls the trigger. The gun is "click". The man pressed the trigger again. Click. And again: click. The man will continue to press the trigger again and again, always getting the same result. The gun will not fire. Although it is fully functional and loaded with bullets, how many times he can pull the trigger, the gun will shoot ever. He will continue this experiment endlessly, becoming immortal.

back to the beginning of the experiment. The man pulls the trigger for the first time and the device detects that the quark spin is clockwise. The gun shoots. The man dies.

But ... one moment. The man had already pulled the trigger first and then, later, a multitude of other times and we know that the gun did not fire. How is it possible that man is dead? Man can not realize it, but he is both alive and dead. Every time he pulls the trigger, the universe splits into two. It will continue to divide, again and again, each time you press the trigger (source: Tegmark).

This "thought experiment" is called suicide quantico. Fu proposto per la prima volta nel 1997 da Max Tegmark, all’epoca ricercatore all’Università di Princeton (oggi ha una cattedra al MIT). Un “esperimento teorico” è un esperimento che avviene solo a livello mentale. Il livello quantico è fino ad oggi il più piccolo livello di materia mai rilevato nell’universo. A questo livello la materia ha dimensioni infinitesimali ed è praticamente impossibile per gli scienziati compiere rilevazioni empiriche utilizzando i tradizionali metodi della ricerca scientifica.

Perciò anziché utilizzare il metodo scientifico – cioè investigare l’evidenza empirica – per studiare il livello Quantum physicists have to use the theoretical experiments. Although these experiments are conducted only as a hypothesis, they find their bases in the data collected by quantum physicists.

What science has been observed at the quantum level has produced more questions than answers. The behavior of quantum particles is unpredictable and our understanding of probability becomes uncertain. For example it was shown that the photons - the elementary particles of light - there are both state of particles and waves.

It seems that these particles do not move in a either way, but in both directions at once. So when we examine the quantum world, the knowledge that it contains it is incomprehensible. Consequently, our understanding of the universe as we know it is put to the test.

This has led some to think that our knowledge of quantum physics is as rudimentary knowledge of the ancient Egyptian astronomers, who believed that the sun was a god. Some scholars believe that further research on the quantum system will be able to find order and predictability where today we only see chaos. But it is possible that quantum systems do not can be understood through the traditional scientific models?

In this article we will look at what the quantum suicide reveals about our universe, as well as other theories that confirm or contradict it.

But first of all, because a scientist can not simply measure the particles that try to study? In the next section we will talk about this fundamental quantum limit of observation as it has been explained by the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg.

the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg
One of the biggest problems with quantum experiments is the seemingly inevitable tendency of humans to influence the state and the speed of infinitesimal particles. This happens with the simple observation of the particles and creates frustration in the students of quantum physics. To overcome this problem, researchers have created huge machinery and processed as particle accelerators, which eliminate any interference of human nature from the physical process of acceleration of the particle motion.

Nevertheless, the comparative results of the measurements obtained by quantum physicists examining a single particle, show that one can not help but interfere with the behavior of quanta (or quantum particles). Even the light that scientists use to better see objects that are observing the behavior of those who can influence. Photons, for example - that is the minimum of light particles have no mass or electric charge - are nonetheless able to interfere with the particles, changing their acceleration and speed.

This is called the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Werner Heisenberg, a German physicist, he knew that the very act observation has an effect on the behavior of quanta. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle may seem difficult to understand, even the name is a little 'intimidating. But it is actually a principle and easy to understand once you understand it even be able to grasp the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics.

Imagine being blind and to have developed, over time, a technique to determine how far you have an object thrown against a bowling ball. If you throw the bowling ball against a stool, which is close to you, the ball will bounce to you quickly and you will know that the object is near. If you throw the ball against something that is just across the road, it will put us more time to come back and you'll know that the object is far away.

The problem is that when you run the ball - especially if it is heavy like a bowling ball - against an object such as a stool, the ball will roll the stool across the room and could still maintain sufficient inertia to return back. At that point you will be able to know where it was before the stool, but not where it is now. In addition, you will be able to determine the speed of the stool after you have hit the ball, but not what was its speed before the colpiste.

This is the problem expressed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

to get the speed of a quark we have to measure it and there is no way to measure it without affecting it in somehow. The same is true for the observation of the position of an object. The uncertainty on the position and velocity of an object makes it difficult for a physical, learning something about that.

course is not that the physical launch bowling balls against particles for the measurements, but even the most infinitesimal interference can push these incredibly small particles to behave differently.

is why quantum physicists are forced to make theoretical experiments, based on observations of real experiments conducted at the quantum level. These theoretical experiments aim to confirm or refute the interpretations, ie the possible explanations of the whole quantum theory.
In the next section we will discuss the foundations of quantum suicide, that is the interpretation of quantum mechanics called "Many Worlds Theory."

HOW IT WORKS The Immortal 'QUANTUM
Josh Clark
site science.howstuffworks.com
Translated by Gianluca Freda (Part 2)
Many Worlds Theory

The thought experiment of the "quantum suicide" is an attempt to show what has become over time the most widely accepted interpretation of quantum physics, the "Many Worlds Theory." This theory was first proposed in 1957 by a researcher at Princeton University, named Hugh Everett III. His theory was ridiculed per decenni, fino a quando uno studente della stessa università, Max Tegman, elaborò l’esperimento del suicidio quantico, che offriva sostegno a questa interpretazione [fonte: The Guardian].

Secondo la Teoria dei Molti Mondi, per ogni possibile risultato di un’azione, il mondo si divide in altrettante copie di se stesso. Si tratta di un processo istantaneo che Everett chiamava decoesione. E’ un po’ come in quei libri “scegli la tua avventura”, solo che invece di scegliere se esplorare la caverna o andare dritti al tesoro, l’universo si divide in due così che ciascuna delle due azioni viene compiuta.

A key aspect of the Many Worlds Theory is that every time that the universe is divided, the person remains unaware of the existence of another version of himself in the universe. This means that the guy who runs straight to the treasure and lives happily ever after is not aware of the version of himself that he entered the cave and is now facing a grave danger, and vice versa.

The same thing happens in the quantum suicide. When the man pulls the trigger, there are two possible outcomes: the gun shoot or not shoot. In this case, the man survives or dies. Whenever that the trigger is pulled, the universe splits to achieve each of the two possible outcomes. When the man dies, the universe is no longer able to divide through the operation of the trigger. The possible outcomes of death is reduced to only one: death continued. But where the man is still alive, there are still two possibilities: the man continues to live or die.

However, when the man pulling the trigger and the universe splits into two, the man who remains alive will be unaware that, in the other version of the universe, he is dead. So continue to live and will still be able to pull the trigger. And every time he pulls the trigger, the universe will split again and the version of the man who survives will be unaware of his own death in all other parallel universes. In this sense, he will be able to exist for eternity. This phenomenon is called quantum immortality.

So why all the people who tried to kill himself did not become immortal? What is interesting in the Many Worlds Theory is the fact that, in some parallel universe, they really are. We do not realize this, because the division universe is out of our life or our death. We are just spectators or observers of the suicide of another person and as observers we are subject to chance.

When the gun fired in the universe - or the version of it - where we are, we are nailed to the results. Although we continue to collect the gun and shoot the man, the universe will remain in a single state. After all, once a person has died, the number of possible results to be obtained by firing his body is reduced to one.

But the Many Worlds Theory contradicts the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the theory of Copenhagen. In the next section we will discuss this theory and see that it changes the rules of quantum suicide.

The Copenhagen Interpretation
Many Worlds Theory of quantum mechanics assumes that, for any given action, the universe splits into many versions of himself in every possible way to achieve results. This theory places the observer outside the equation. In this theory, we are not able to influence on the outcome of an event through simple observation, as theorized by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Many Worlds Theory has turned from head to foot another theory of quantum mechanics, once widely accepted. And in the unpredictable quantum universe, this really means something.
For most of the last century, the most accepted explanation of the fact that a single quantum particle behaves in different ways was the so-called Copenhagen interpretation. Although the interpretation of the Many Worlds has recently gained great credit, many quantum physicists continue to believe that the correct interpretation is that Copenhagen.

The Copenhagen interpretation was proposed for the first time in 1920 by physicist Niels Bohr. According to this interpretation, a quantum particle does not exist in a state or another, but simultaneously in all possible states. It 's only when we observe its state that the quantum particle is essentially forced to choose one among many possibilities, and this is the state that we observe. As might be forced to assume a different state at each observation, which explains why so unpredictable behavior of these particles.

The state of an object that exists in all possible states is called superposition. The combination of all possible states of an object can exist - for example, in the case of photons which move in two directions at once, in the form of wave or particle - is the wavefunction of the object .
The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics by Bohr date had been established as a hypothesis by a famous thought experiment based on a cat and a box. This is known as "Schrödinger cat" proposed for the first time by the Viennese physicist Erwin Schroedinger in 1935.

In this thought experiment, Schrodinger imagined a cat to put in a box with a piece of radioactive material and a Geiger counter (a device for detecting radiation). The Geiger counter was set so that when it noted the decay of radioactive material by pushing the hammer that broke a vial of hydrocyanic acid which, when spread on the box, he would have killed the cat.

To eliminate any possible certainty about the fate of the cat, the experiment was to take place within an hour, a period long enough for the radioactive material could decline, but also short enough that this could not happen.

In the experiment of Schrödinger, the cat was locked inside the box. During his stay within it, the cat came to exist in an unknowable state. Can not be observed, it was not possible to say if he were alive or had died. It existed in a state that was both life and death. It 's like quantum physics had wanted to give an answer to the old Zen question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it really sound?

Since the interpretation Copenhagen says that an object, when it is observed, it is forced to assume a definite state, the experiment of quantum suicide is incompatible with this theory. Since the direction of the spin of the quarks when measured from the trigger becomes observable, sooner or later the quark will be forced to take over the time that the gun will shoot and kill the man.

But it seems silly that? Indeed these experiments and these interpretations of quantum theory can teach us something? In the next section we'll look at the possible implications of these ideas.

The implications of quantum physics
Compared to the theories of classical science and Newtonian physics, the theories proposed to explain quantum physics seem crazy. Erwin Schrödinger himself said that his experiment was "quite ridiculous" [source: Goldstein, Sheldon]. But what science has been able to observe the laws that govern the world we see every day lose their value at the quantum level.

Quantum physics is a relatively new discipline, which was drafted only in 1900. The theories that have been developed on the problems it poses are just theories. In addition, there are conflicting theories giving different explanations of specific events that occur at the quantum level. Which of them will be revealed in the course of history, be the right one? Perhaps the theory will provide a correct explanation of quantum phenomena is not yet even been drafted.

The person who will propose it is perhaps not yet born. But given the kind of logic introduced by this particular field of study, it is possible that all the theories which try to explain quantum physics are equally true at the same time, even if they contradict each other?

The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics, Neils Bohr is perhaps given by the various theories among the most comforting. If you believe that the particles exist simultaneously in all possible states - in superposition - our vision of the universe comes out a bit 'shaken, but still understandable.

Bohr's theory, Furthermore, it is comforting because it says that we humans are the cause for an object takes shape. As scholars are frustrating the ability of particles to exist in more than one state, our observation has no effect on them. At least not continue to exist in all possible states even as we watch.

The Many-Worlds interpretation offered by Everett is far less comforting. This theory takes away from our hands all power quantum universe. On the contrary, we find ourselves to be mere passengers on a series of divisions that occur producing each possible outcome. In essence, the Many Worlds Theory is our idea of \u200b\u200bcause-effect relationships should be to hell.

This makes it somewhat shocking the Many Worlds Theory. If it is true, then in a universe parallel to that in cui viviamo attualmente Adolf Hitler è riuscito ad attuare il suo piano di conquista del mondo. Ma allo stesso tempo, in un altro universo, gli Stati Uniti non hanno mai lanciato le atomiche su Hiroshima e Nagasaki.

La Teoria dei Molti Mondi contraddice certamente anche la postulazione del Rasoio di Occam, secondo la quale la spiegazione più semplice è di solito quella corretta. Anche più strano è il corollario della Teoria dei Molti Mondi, secondo il quale il tempo non avrebbe un moto coerente e lineare. Al contrario, si muoverebbe per salti e partenze, esistendo non come una linea retta, ma come una serie di ramificazioni. Queste ramificazioni sono tanto più numerose quanto maggiore is the number of possible consequences to all actions that are performed.

It 'difficult to imagine what will be the consequences of our understanding of the quantum world. The field theory has already made tremendous progress since its inception, more than a century ago. Although possessed their own personal interpretation of the quantum world, Bohr would probably have accepted the theory of the Many Worlds of Hugh Everett introduced as a result. In the end it was precisely Bohr said: "If someone is shocked by quantum theory, clearly has not understood it."

Fonti
* “Hugh Everett III and the Many Worlds Theory.” Everything Forever. http://everythingforever.com/everett.htm
* “Hugh Everett III and the Many Worlds Theory.” Everything Forever. http://everythingforever.com/everett.htm
* Brooks, Michael. “Enlightenment in the Barrel of a Gun.” The Guardian. October 15, 1997.
http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/everett_guardian.html
* Budnik, Paul. “Schrödinger’s Cat.” Mountain Math Software. http://www.mtnmath.com/faq/meas-qm-3.html
* Goldstein, Sheldon. “Quantum Theory Without Observers.” July 23, 1997. Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University. http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~oldstein/papers/qts/qts/html.
* Higgo, James. “Does the ‘many-worlds’ interpretation of quantum mechanics imply immortality?” Nov. 10, 1998. http://www.higgo.com/quantum/qti.htm
* Horgan, John. “Quantum Philosophy.” Fortune City. http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/qphil.html
* Price, Michael Clive. “The Everett FAQ.” BLTC Research. Februrary 1995. http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm#decoherence
* Tegmark, Max. “The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: Many Worlds or Many Words?” Princeton University. September 15, 1997. http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/9709/9709032v1.pdf
* "Quantum Mechanics." Fusion Anomaly. http://fusionanomaly.net/quantummechanics.html
* "Schrödinger's Cat for a 6th grader." Mountain Math Software. http://www.mtnmath.com/cat.html
* "The Many-World Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics." Station1. http://www.station1.net/DouglasJones/many.htm

From: http://blogghete.blog.dada.net/

The Theory of Many Worlds: Interview with Lev Vaidman
by Barbara Ainis

A paradox impeccable

For the language, even the most poetic, it is difficult to explain a paradox in a mathematical equation no. Who remembers the movie Sliding Doors? A fantastic puzzle? You would not think. According to the quantum mathematical equation seems easy to be inscribed in one of the most scientific.

This interview allows us to slip into candidly mathematical simplicity and elegance of the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics to worthy of a Hollywood film. And in a school science among the most orthodox.

Imagine: You are faced with a choice to make and something, perhaps a phone call or a traffic jam, intervenes to make you take a course rather than another. Imagine that at that precise moment your world is divided into two, one past and two future, who knows very different. Imagine that this happens many times that a myriad of worlds and populate our Universe.

resembles the plot of a movie, but this is the experiential result of a rigorous mathematical theory, the Theory of Many Worlds precisely.

Such an interpretation of quantum mechanics in the internationally renowned Israeli physicist Lev Vaidman, we interviewed during his stay in Italy, is one of the most important supporters. With him, we talked about the origin and development of strengths and weaknesses of a theory that can preserve the original formalism of quantum physics by removing the most problematic of his postulates: the collapse of the wave.

S & C: The Many Worlds Theory is not new, the first to introduce it was Hugh Everett in 1957. But his popularity among physicists is increasing recently. Perhaps it is good to remind readers of what we speak. What is meant by the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)?

Lev Vaidman: It means a physical theory able to explain our experience with a mathematical formalism very "cheap" and elegant, which does not change the basic laws of quantum mechanics. The idea behind is that the existence of myriads of worlds in the universe in addition to the world we perceive.

These worlds take place beginning each time a quantum experiment in a laboratory physics as in everyday life. The experiment, such as the uncertain flicker of a neon light, has several possible outcomes, which is said non-zero probability.

We only notice of the occurrence of one of the possible outcomes, what is true in the world that we see (the light comes on at a given time), but according to MWI all possible outcomes are realized, each in a different world. In this sense, this interpretation of quantum mechanics can be divided into two parts: a rigorous mathematical theory and an explanation of our experiences in the light of this theory in connection with the concept of state quantum universe, ie the wave function that describes it.

S & C: So is the mathematical theory that builds on the interpretation of many worlds. She calls it an extremely economical and elegant theory. From what did the need for a new mathematical formalism?

Lev Vaidman: It 's important to understand that the formalism of quantum mechanics, the quantum equations, give a representation of reality that corresponds to that of many worlds. A situation in which a quantum experiment all possible outcomes si avverano. 

Questo è stato chiaro fin dagli inizi della fisica dei quanti, ma l’idea è sempre stata considerata tanto assurda e in palese contraddizione con l’osservazione sperimentale da pretendere l’introduzione del postulato del collasso: l’esito di un esperimento quantistico non è determinato dalle condizioni iniziali dell’Universo prima dell’esperimento, ma solo le probabilità sono governate dallo stato iniziale. 

Ecco “spiegato” il perché osserviamo l’avverarsi di uno solo dei risultati possibili. Nel corso degli anni physicists were, however, very unhappy with this postulate, and tried to resolve the problem by changing or adding something to quantum mechanics (defining the collapse as a random effect genuine, or by introducing an ontology of Bohmian particle trajectories). From my point of view, these attempts have not been very successful.

the contrary, the Many Worlds theory is presented as a proposal to remain faithful to quantum mechanics, as was originally born without the postulate of collapse, and then you admit the philosophical implications of this theory, namely that there are worlds paralleli in ognuno dei quali si avvera uno e uno solo dei possibili risultati di un esperimento quantistico. Non ci sono evidenze sperimentali in favore della teoria del collasso e contro la teoria dei Molti Mondi. La MWI è una teoria deterministica per un universo fisico e spiega perché il (o, meglio, un) mondo appare non deterministico agli osservatori umani.

S&C: In base a che cosa si crea un nuovo mondo? Ossia, qualsiasi possibilità si trasforma in un mondo e quindi si realizza?

Lev Vaidman: Non tutti i mondi che si possono immaginare esistono. Quando si costruisce un esperimento quantistico c’è una probabilità non-zero che ci sia un insieme di risultati. Quello che sappiamo è che ci sarà una separazione in un numero di mondi pari al numero di possibili esiti che vengono associati a questo esperimento. Per proseguire nell’esempio di prima, potrà accadere che io sia condizionato da una luce al neon rotta che si accende e si spegne, e questo evento potrà cambiare o ritardare una mia scelta. Questo è un evento quantistico e provocherà una separazione e la nascita di mondi distinti. 

Perché avvenga questa separazione abbiamo bisogno di una situazione fisica particolare che ne sia causa. La meccanica quantistica ci assicura che ci sono un certo number of outcomes for an experiment, but it assures us of the fact that I'm strong enough or sufficiently convinced to give credit to something, even if the different outcomes are expected in the experiment. If you are not sure if I can divide my world into two distinct roads, probably I will not give then the existence of both these roads. What I can not do is stop this quantum device and the results that can give.

The full article is on the Science and Knowledge No 18 (on newsstands and bookshelves)

Source: Link