eXtr33m wrote:
Also I dont like to believe that there exist some Random thing... and i dont think nobody can ever prove that
"Randomness" of the fate of all particles in the universe is only one out of many possible explanations. This one happens to be standard, but not all physicists agree with that. Just like not everyone in a country thinks their president was the best possible choice, only the majority that voted for him does.
Now, I'll try to explain what and where exactly quantum physics is. It's "under development", unlike the kinetic theory of gases (for example). So not all the quantum phenomena were discovered yet, and heck, the so-called "standard model" (what we think particles are and how they behave) doesn't even include gravity*.
Classic physics:
When you have a gas (billions of atoms/molecules) there is a chance (probability) one of them will hit the wall at given speed and given spot. We do know the basic laws of how each atom/molecule moves (thanks to sir Isaac Newton). But there is still no way of telling where each and every atom/molecule is, all we know is that there is a probability of atoms/molecules being somewhere and having some velocity (or momentum).
Quantum physics:
We know (statistically) what can happen based on the information we gathered so far, but we don't know exactly how each of the particles behave, all we know is statistical probability. Unfortunately for the time being that is all we can know about quantum particles.
Thus, the "random" is the result of statistics (since we honestly don't know, it is as good as random for us). Makes calculations and interpretation easier.
At least that's my version of Einstein's opinion**, and what I agree with him.
*Gravity is one of the greatest mysteries in modern physics. No one knows how it works. All we know is that F=G*m1*m2/r^2.
**Einstein's opinion was that quantum physics lacks knowledge of the basic principles (like Newton's laws are for classic physics).
havoc wrote:
natirips wrote:
I think it's stupid, but it's also useful. Most modern microchips are as efficient as they are thanks to it.
no, microchips have nothing to do with quantum physics/mechanics yet. they are still plain old transistors, just very small. but we are getting there, slowly.
While we may not have "quantum computers" from the sci-fi, our knowledge of how an electron behaves inside metals and semi-conductors would've been far from enough to construct a silicon-based chip without the knowledge gained from quantum physics.
eXtr33m wrote:
1)The video says when you have entangled electrons you change a spin of one the spin of second one changed too which i think in a practical way could lead transferring real informations faster then light..
AFAIK this phenomena (entanglement) is still being researched. They originally thought that neutrinos never slow down below the speed of light in vacuum, but we know now that they never exceed the speed of light in vacuum.
eXtr33m wrote:
2)Schrodinger's cat -> Cat is neither alive, neither dead it is half dead and half alive. (AFAIK)
Like I explained above, according to Einstein, this is only statistical prediction. Once we take a look at the cat, it will indeed be either dead or alive, and only either dead or alive.
The second postulate of quantum mechanics secretly and between the lines admits the fact that we don't understand quantum mechanics and that all we know is the statistical probability:
Liboff's 'Introductory quantum mechanics' (1980) wrote:
Measurement of the observable A that yields the value a leaves the system is the state φ_a, where φ_a is the eigenfunction of Ᾱ that corresponds to the eigenvalues a.
Sounds a bit outdated, but this is what they taught me at the university.
Edit: "φ_a" should be "φ" with index "a".
Oh, and for translation: when measuring something, the process of measurement has forced that something (i.e. the cat) into a realistic state (we found out if the cat is alive or dead, and it's "no longer both"). All this time we only didn't know if it was alive or dead so we couldn't tell anything better than statistics about the cat.
eXtr33m wrote:
3) Random thing is a thing which happened absolutely without any pattern. It would mean the world dont have exact future.
"Random" here is too often interpreted literally (unfortunately even by physicists). Random only means "we don't know exactly". At least according to Einstein, with whom I agree on this one.