Pilot wave theory

pilot wave theory is the most deterministic theory

Yeah, that was my point.

I see, sorry for getting confused.

At this point I'm not even sure if you aren't actually mocking me post-ironically, but nevermind.

Daily reminder: Anything that attempts a "realist" interpretation of QM like Pilot Wave, were eternally BTFO by renormalization working out in QED in the late 40s.

Fundamentally, there aren't particles, but excitations of fields. It is these excitations that we observe to be particles, with specific properties and behaviors, whose interactions with other matter is dictated by the mechanisms through which one field interacts with other fields. This wave/particle duality is, in actuality, the fact that we are observing particle-like effects from what are essentially wave-packets. These wave-packets, for all practical purposes are localized in space, which is why they appear to be particle-like, but their wave nature allows them to behave like waves.

Have you ever wondered why we cannot determine the size of the electron? If you treat the electron as a classical spinning sphere of charge, you quickly come to several conclusions, the most drastic and law-breaking ones being the surface speed of such an object would exceed the speed of light, and that mass concentrated into such a small sphere would collapse into a black hole. Now, treating the electron as a localized wave packet explains why electrons can behave like both waves and particles, occupying an in-determinant amount of space due to its 'presence' being smeared out.

that any attempts at a*

I think the idea behind Pilotwave is that the field you speak of has been so severely excited (as in had energy pumped into it) to a degree that what was just a wave has actually managed to fling itself free of the the 'body of liquid'/field and now exists in a tiny closed-circuit field bouncing over the top of the main field in the same way OP's video shows the bubbled liquid to.

Of course, to evidence this interpretation, you'd need to come up with a good reason that the highly excited closed-circuit fields in this case wouldn't just re-integrate immediately with the main field on contact.

>the field you speak of has been so severely excited (as in had energy pumped into it) to a degree that what was just a wave has actually managed to fling itself free

That is not how this works. These fields are the fabric of the space-time in which we live. It is the excitation of these fields that we perceive to be things like scalars, vectors, axial vectors, etc.
You should go study up on QFT and then we can have a decent discussion.

Man, I fuckin talked to the guy who wrote the paper on the boucing drops. He said it's just an analogy to QM, literally put it in there to get meme lords pumped on his shit. Though as a piece of fluid dynamics, it's pretty tight.

>we live in a world where the dankest memes receive the most funding

Academia is so dumb zoz

reminder that pilot wave theory is the only white approved theory of quantum mechanics.

what does this even mean

Daily reminder that the universe is inherently probabilistic and there are no certainties.

What about the possibility of superdeterminism? Ultimately, science can't answer this question, because there is always a "what if" like that.

>explaining how the world physically works

what exactly do you think physicists do m8

What about the possibility of behaving as if it it superdeterministic although it is really not?

I'd say so. Not sure why the idea is so hated. Probably has to do with the fact that once you realize there is an ether, you realize you can pull energy out of space which would disrupt existing industry.

Super deterministic local realistic influences would have to conspire centuries before an experiment is done to produce the kind of correlations seen in Bell experiments. You may as well invoke God to explain why the Earth revolves

Meant for

>produce identical results

Two different models cant produce identically same models. You should take "Introduction to epistemology" at your local library or school.

T. Natural philosophist

Daily reminder that both determinism and randomness are Linguistic red herrings integral to the nightmare of Matter.

Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments: A Fresh Look
orgonelab.org/miller.htm

Can someone explain to me how pilot wave theory deals with light-speed particles? How can the pilot wave be projected in front of the particle?

This is pretty good quora.com/Why-dont-more-physicists-subscribe-to-pilot-wave-theory/answer/Thad-Roberts?share=c3d96ac2&srid=iCeG

>shitposting on a QM thread
>not knowing what the fuck people are talking about but want to join in anyway
If you havnt read anything on material why type your dumb shit?
t. pdh in Nuclear Physics

Yeah, it also isn't lorentz invariant and it's nonlocal

But they can, and they do. All interpretations must be mathematically identical, otherwise it would be trivial to pick between them.

Physicists develop models that produce predictions that match experiments.

>match experiments.
match the interpretations of experiments.

>experiments.
carried by total strangers craving fundings and monthly salaries.

Daily reminder that the universe is concept stemming form your imagination

Can observation disprove mathematics?

math is used to describe how reality functions. not the other way around. There isnt any sort of observation that differntiates between accepted QM and pilot waves

>Math is used to describe how reality functions

I suggest you study deeper into philosophy and mathematics

Physics is a part of mathematics. Mathematics can describe infinite amount of universes, and one of them happens to be the physical universe we are constrained in.

No shit dude. Are you even arguing with my post? Mathematics is used to describe how reality functions and part of that are the constants that our fields in our universe froze at during the big bang. So?
>t. phd Nuclear Physics

All but one mathematical universe are imaginary; not reality.

>a theory is a theory and not proven
whoooooaaaa holllyyy shiitttt noooo waaayyy

lol what

Seems like physicists can't do dialogue.

seems like philosophers cant underatand simple mathematics

Explain the thermal capacity of para and ortho hydrogen using pilot wave theory.
Explain Fermi-Dirac statistics and the ultra violette catastrophe using pilot wave theory.

Just because a theory is kinetic doesn't make it more intuitive and fundamental. Abstract properties like angular momentum are also described by a quantum wave function, ensuring any hidden variable theory will be extremely cumbersome, weird and un-intuitive.

You treat this like an argument instead of an opportunity to learn. Typical low-power college student.

but muh assumptions!

WOAH, what DOES the pilot wave for angular momentum look like?

Lol. I got my phd two years ago. I know far more about the subject matter than you. You are fundamentally wrong about this and now just arguing nonpoints. Congratz.
Next time at least read the wikipedia page about it

Are you literally retarded? The copenhagen interpretation and many worlds theorem basically tell us there is no way to know which path a (name a particle or wave) will take in the double slit experiment, we can only calculate the probability of its potential paths. If pilot wave theory is true, given all the initial conditions of the particle/wave, with the right math we could calculate EXACTLY which path it will take every time. That is a huge difference, and would give our models of the universe much more predictive capabilities.

>given all the initial conditions of the particle/wave
But can we ever know this, even theoretically? Isn't it the whole point of "hidden variable" theories that we can postulate some underlying mechanism but it is by definition inscrutable?

>literaly stating we need prior information which then makes them both have the same result by definition
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

There's nothing to learn from you

Yeah nice response. I'm sure this kind of behavior somehow progresses the path you have chosen for yourself in your life, even if I don't immediately see the positive consequences.

>mass of an electron sized particle would create a black hole
Kek, no. Electrons have no inherent mass, the mass we observe has to do with the energy contained by said electron due to mass-energy equivalence.

>explains why electrons can behave like both waves and particles
They have performed the double slit experiment with bucky-balls (large carbon molecules) that consist of like 60 carbon atoms iirc. The same particle wave duality was observed. Now you could argue that everything is waves when you get down to the subatomic particles those atoms are made of, but thats a little problematic because by that logic, you could perform the double slit experiment with entire dead cats in a dark vacuum. Mabye you could, but i digress. Pilot wave theory seems to explain particle wave duality of large molecules a little more neatly than traditional QM does.

>hurr durr let me make overly wordy statements with my encyclopedia about nothing.
Nice try dude. You fail to understand the premise of the topic and you cant come back with any sort of evidence to back up your idiocy. Fuck off.

Wow literally everything in this post is wrong. Is this bait? If you don't understand how something works please don't create misinformation.

No, no it doesnt. Our current models say even with all of the initial conditions of the particle/wave, before its subjected to the double slit experiment, you can only determine a probable distribution.

Hard to say, we certainly dont know how to even go about doing it yet. Whos to say what we could develop a few hundred years from now though. If we just assume pilot wave theory is wrong and its impossible to know beyond a probabilistic distribution we would probably never bother to check.

This is why I hate the current physics climate. It's all predictive models and no philosophy.

It's like the ancient civilizations, they could predict solar/lunar eclipses and shit but didn't know the Earth was round and rotated around sun which is a giant ball of plasma.

>But can we ever know this
No we can't, like you said, if we could know them then it would no longer be a hidden variables theory. Whether likes it or not pilot wave and every other interpretation makes the same predictions.

So what would you like them to do? How would you like them to differentiate between models that produce identical results? The only thing that changes from, say Copenhagen to Many Worlds, is the meaning attributed to the equations.

The ancient greeks (and much older civilizations) knew the earth was round and actually calculated its circumfrence with pretty accurate results. But im just splitting hairs, i knew what you were saying i just like correcting people.

they understood the precession of the equinoxes and could calculate, in fact

The variables are only hidden until we learn how to measure them. Sure pilot wave theory says they are "unknowable" but there are plenty of things that have fallen under that category and since became known. They used to think atoms were the smallest possible particles not too long ago.

no moron they are unknowable because they by definition cant be directly measured

*With our current understanding of the universe they cant be directly measured.

Fixed that for ya bud.

>by definiton
Literaly reading comprehension.

Definitely agree with the guy, I think understanding why our models works the way they do, is helpful when coming up with new theory's. The further we get into the math without seeing physical reality, the harder it gets to get your head around our current understanding and ahead of it.

I doubt Einstein would have had his amazing insights for general relativity if he just dismissed it as "its just the way the math works out, whatever. All i need to do is find equations that fit."
And what is worse now, is that I hear a lot of physicist say that even thinking about the physicality of spacetime should be left to Philosophers. Like they will come up with any great insights.

I understand their current way of working is very effective, but I still feel they are kinda just finding their way around in the dark, which must feel tedious.

I suppose the earth is the center of the solar system too then? That was scientific consensus at one point after all, theres no way our understanding of something could be wrong.

You literally can't read anything im writing so youre forced to make up arguments. Nice. If you want to understand pilot waves please go read a book on it or atleast the wikipedia page moron.

>"its just the way the math works out

But that's pretty much what he said, the strong equivalence principle was his way of fitting SR inside GR.

>i doubt einstein would have had his amazing insights for general relativity if he just sismissed it as "its just the way the math works out, whatever. all i need to do is find equations that fit"
thats literally the majority of his work though. Nearly his entire work was about how strange the math works out to be and then decades later people experimentally tested it

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory

>i.e., that quantum mechanics is ultimately incomplete, and that a complete theory would provide descriptive categories to account for all observable behavior and thus avoid any indeterminism.

Get rekt kid.

You didnt even read the page yourself you fucking moron.
>In August 2011,Roger ColbeckandRenato Rennerpublished a proof that any extension of quantum mechanical theory, whether using hidden variables or otherwise, cannot provide a more accurate prediction of outcomes, assuming that observers can freely choose the measurement settings.
>In this sense, we show the following: under the assumption that measurement settings can be chosen freely, quantum theory really is complete".

next time read the fucking thing you post before you post it.
Is this what its like to argue with highschoolers?

Going Back to a Fresh Shitpost

lol if you dont understand hidden variables why are you shitposting about it

This thread has proven that physicists are total spergs and autists

>someone disagrees with me
>REEEEEEEEE
Who are the true autists here?

You think he just took the numbers of how things move, and started brute forcing until he found equations that fit. He had an understanding and worked out how the equations looked, as he was working on the numbers he corrected his own understanding and worked on new equations.

Where you getting this from anyway, the stories of his insights for relativity are famously sensational(And probably overly soo.)

I never tired to say that its the only way to make progress or anything like that, all I'm saying is that it seems very helpful, and probably shouldn't be dismissed and ridiculed like it seems to be in some cases.

Why are you so aggressive when you are talking about pilot waves? Or am I wrong; wasn't this dialogue about pilot waves... Pen warrior :D

You couldnt care to understand pilot waves and then insult someone else and now complain when they insult you back. what?

I am not into QM but afaik the whole thing with no hidden variables is not a conclusion from some interpretation but it comes before the interpretation. This would mean that you can't just say you can perfectly determine a path if pilot wave is true

How can you even prove that such a thing is theoretically impossible? Let's assume we invent a new device which allows us to measure or even choose some hidden variable, which will make the precies outcome of a quantum experiment known (non-probabilistically). Under this assumption, quantum theory as we now know it is not complete, Q.E.D., how do these Colbeck and Renner guys get around this?
I've read the abstract and a bit of their paper but I don't really understand it desu.

That's correct. Hidden variables commonly gets confused for saying that our models fail us when in actuality hidden variables is saying there are specific things we can not measure/determine from those measurments

What part of "our current understanding of the universe could be wrong" do you not understand? Im not saying pilot wave theory is the answer, but it provides a means to more accurately predict the behavior of our universe than our current models do if its true. If you are just going to say "fuck it, they are the same theory worded differently, lets just stick with what we know" you are potentially limiting science as a whole from ever understanding the universe at a deeper level than we do now. Why not entertain the thought that we could be wrong, if it means science has more room for advancement than we previosly thought? Show me evidence pilot wave theory is without a doubt wrong, until then its a thought that should at least be entertained, if not investigated.

A shitpost about a shitpost. We metashitposting now?

>You think he just took the numbers of how things move, and started brute forcing until he found equations that fit

No, started with some physical intuition, the derived some equations and computed their consequences.

It has even been experimentally proven that hidden variables are not behind the randomness in the wave function colapose. There is literally nothing to measure before you colapose it that can tell you how it will collapse.

I never argued that pilot wave theory was the correct one. It is fact that you can not differentiate between the two theories. Of course our understanding can be wrong but thats not what Hidden variables is about.
Pilot wave theory does not allow for more accurate understanding of the behaviour of our universe. thats factually wrong and shows your lack of understanding of pilot wave theory itsself.

shit poting about shit posts about shit posts?

Exactly my point. Which is why I don't think anything in physics should be left for philosophers to discuss. Maybe they can never be proven to be one way or the other, but they might assist work on new theories.

You all are missing one very important thing:

In the double slit experiment, once you start measuring which slit it goes through it behaves like a particle with no wave and doesn't create an interference pattern. So just by measuring, the pilot wave disappears. If you are willing to accept that, you can just as easily accept that measuring somehow collapses the wave into a particle. The point is, no interpretation of QM is completely "rational".

Pilot wave theory is nonlocal, so the waves can affect things faster than light.

>Exactly my point.
What point? It's literally a restatement of what I said earlier.

It's pretty shitty and misleading. Copenhagen does not mean the observer is special.