IS THE UNIVERSE BASED ON HAZARD
OMNES, Roland : Professor of theoretical physiques, University, Paris,
Méchanique Quantique (Odile Jacob, Paris, 2004) Published : in French
Professional literature : http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires
>browse>select author>enter name>browse>select name on button>view checked papers)
REPORT on some essential points (translated and written in blue) from the above mentioned book of OMNES R. with respect to this question. (reported and translated by F. Jansen)
Interpretation of the uncertainty principle of HEISENGERG
For a public at the student level in physics R. OMNES describes history and achievements of quantum mechanical physics. He mentions that Heisenberg introduced in 1927 the uncertainty principle, which indicates the impossibility to determine at the same time the location and velocity of a subatomic particle.
“The essential for the interpretation is that the uncertainty relation forbids the representation of a particle in our mind as a point in space. This is impossible to imagine, because the idea of a trajectory implies the simultaneous existence of position and well-defined speed. It is the original concept of a particle, in the classical sense, which is now rejected. “ (page 55, line 19)
The absolute hazard (page 51)
OMNES shows the existence of an absolute hazard which is quite different from the classical hazard in lottery games, where
“ the hazard is a manifestation of our incapacity to measure and calculate perfectly”
( page 51, last line), although all physical laws are well known.
“ It is an intrinsic hazard, without any ignored or hidden cause, ….. the absolute hazard.”
(page 52 line 11,)
“In order to verify the predictions of the quantum mechanical theory, which essentially consist in probabilities, a great number of measurements have to be executed in order to compare the really observed frequencies of events with the probability predictions." (page 52, line 27)
“…. two distinct worlds have to be taken into account. One is the one of the laboratory and normal life, macroscopic, causal and clear. The other is the one of particles, atoms, being formal and submitted to the absolute hazard.” ( 52 line 40)
“ … Bohr insisted on the continuity existing between the two worlds or better two visions of the same world. That is what he called the principle of correspondence ” (page 53 line 1)
“Within the twelve categories of KANT two at least, …, must be revised. First there is causality, which is considered as indispensable for rationality. It is clear that causality is no longer valid at the atomic range.There is also the category of reality” (page 56, line 21)
“ The world of atoms is by no doubt real ….. On cannot define it precisely by concepts, since if an electron is real, can it be imagined by a wave, necessarily extended, or by the concept of a very small object, a particle ? KANT asks in principal that all ideas can be totally expressed in a coherent and essentially unique form“, which is no longer possible.
“… different languages, incompatible with each other, can be applied to the same atomic object. … on may consider an electron as a wave, or as a particle, but one cannot use both languages simultaneously. This continues within the way of thinking, since with respect to an electron one can make reference to its position or to its velocity, but not simultaneously to its position and velocity ( because of the uncertainty relation).” (page 57, line 8)
“ The interpretation of quantum mechanics can not be limited to a simple harmonization of a theoretical formalism with the traditional ideas coming from our daily experiences and are expressed with common sense. In one way or another our view should be based on a new manner of thinking and understanding” (page 56, line 42)