Difficulties of Discovery

Author(s):  
Mark Byers

The uncertainty of the glyph, reflecting a new commitment to the unpredictability of history and the fallibility of scientific reason, is shown in this chapter to have generated a major avant-garde interest in modern physics, particularly quantum mechanics. The chapter charts cognate developments in Olson’s work and that of Wolfgang Paalen, an Austrian-Mexican painter who had a decisive influence on abstract expressionism through his journal Dyn. Both Olson and Paalen are shown to have turned to post-classical physics—particularly Heisenberg’s ‘uncertainty principle’—as a platform for a new late modernist art that would break with both the political and the aesthetic principles of high modernism.

Author(s):  
Frank S. Levin

The subject of Chapter 8 is the fundamental principles of quantum theory, the abstract extension of quantum mechanics. Two of the entities explored are kets and operators, with kets being representations of quantum states as well as a source of wave functions. The quantum box and quantum spin kets are specified, as are the quantum numbers that identify them. Operators are introduced and defined in part as the symbolic representations of observable quantities such as position, momentum and quantum spin. Eigenvalues and eigenkets are defined and discussed, with the former identified as the possible outcomes of a measurement. Bras, the counterpart to kets, are introduced as the means of forming probability amplitudes from kets. Products of operators are examined, as is their role underpinning Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. A variety of symbol manipulations are presented. How measurements are believed to collapse linear superpositions to one term of the sum is explored.


Author(s):  
Anurag Chapagain

Abstract: It is a well-known fact in physics that classical mechanics describes the macro-world, and quantum mechanics describes the atomic and sub-atomic world. However, principles of quantum mechanics, such as Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, can create visible real-life effects. One of the most commonly known of those effects is the stability problem, whereby a one-dimensional point base object in a gravity environment cannot remain stable beyond a time frame. This paper expands the stability question from 1- dimensional rod to 2-dimensional highly symmetrical structures, such as an even-sided polygon. Using principles of classical mechanics, and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, a stability equation is derived. The stability problem is discussed both quantitatively as well as qualitatively. Using the graphical analysis of the result, the relation between stability time and the number of sides of polygon is determined. In an environment with gravity forces only existing, it is determined that stability increases with the number of sides of a polygon. Using the equation to find results for circles, it was found that a circle has the highest degree of stability. These results and the numerical calculation can be utilized for architectural purposes and high-precision experiments. The result is also helpful for minimizing the perception that quantum mechanical effects have no visible effects other than in the atomic, and subatomic world. Keywords: Quantum mechanics, Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, degree of stability, polygon, the highest degree of stability


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Yasin

In 1927 Heisenberg has invented the uncertainty principle. The principle of uncertainty is, "It is impossible to determine the position and momentum of a particle at the same time."The more accurately the momentum is measured, the more uncertain the position will be. Just knowing the position would make the momentum uncertain. Einstein was adamant against this principle until his death. He thought that particles have some secret rules. Einstein thought, "The uncertainty principle is incomplete. There is a mistake somewhere that has resulted in uncertainty. Many did not accept Einstein then. But I'm sure Einstein was right then, there are secret rules for particles. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is also 100% correct . I recently published a research paper named "Quantum Certainty Mechanics"[1], which shows the principle of measuring the momentum and position of particles by the quantum certainty principle. Why uncertainty comes from certainty is the main topic of this research paper. When the value of the energy absorbed by the electron in the laboratory is calculated, the uncertainty is removed. The details are discussed below.


ARTMargins ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Erber

Japanese art critics of the 1950s perceived the locus of a new materialist aesthetics in the new trends of informal abstraction emanating from the United States and France. This revealed a stark contrast with the idea of individual freedom that informed North-American discourse on Abstract Expressionism. Focusing on the writings of Miyakawa Atsushi, Haryū Ichirō, and Segi Shinichi, this article explores the political significance of the question of matter in Japanese postwar art criticism and indicates its importance for the subsequent development of avant-garde art in 1960s Japan.


2021 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-156
Author(s):  
Jeanne Peijnenburg ◽  
David Atkinson

Abstract How certain is Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle?Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle is at the heart of the orthodox or Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. We first sketch the history that led up to the formulation of the principle. Then we recall that there are in fact two uncertainty principles, both dating from 1927, one by Werner Heisenberg and one by Earle Kennard. Finally, we explain that recent work in physics gives reason to believe that the principle of Heisenberg is invalid, while that of Kennard still stands.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre GEORGES

Are General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics incompatible? Each in their world, that of the infinitely large and that of the infinitely small, they did not seem to interfere as long as they avoided each other. However, it is their fundamental oppositions that prevent the scientific community from achieving a unification of physics. The proposal of this paper is to provide a mathematical proof of incompatibility, beyond the fact that they have fundamentally different principles, between the foundations of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, namely the deformation of the space-time geometry and the Uncertainty Principle. It will thus be possible to provide an absolute limitation in establishing a unifying theory of physics, if any. Moreover, while respecting the conditions fixed by the Uncertainty Principle, it will be tempted to determine with accuracy and simultaneity, the position and the speed of a non-relativistic particle, by application of relativistic principles and bypassing the problems raised by such an operation. The Uncertainty Principle as stated by Werner Heisenberg will be then, in the light of observations made on the measurement of the time dilatation and in accordance with its own terms, refuted by the present. - Physics Essays, Volume 31, Issue 3 (September 2018), Article 12 - https://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1667-12-alexandre-georges-incompatibility-between-einstein-s-general-relativity-and-heisenberg-s-uncertainty-principle.html


Author(s):  
Roger Penrose

The word ‘uncertainty’, in the context of quantum mechanics, usually evokes an impression of an essential unknowability of what might actually be going on at the quantum level of activity, as is made explicit in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and in the fact that the theory normally provides only probabilities for the results of quantum measurement. These issues limit our ultimate understanding of the behaviour of things, if we take quantum mechanics to represent an absolute truth. But they do not cause us to put that very ‘truth’ into question. This article addresses the issue of quantum ‘uncertainty’ from a different perspective, raising the question of whether this term might be applied to the theory itself, despite its unrefuted huge success over an enormously diverse range of observed phenomena. There are, indeed, seeming internal contradictions in the theory that lead us to infer that a total faith in it at all levels of scale leads us to almost fantastical implications.


It is conventional to denote the physics of the period 1700-1900, from A the Principia to the advent of the relativity and quantum theories, as ‘classical’ or ‘Newtonian’ physics. These terms are not, however, very satisfactory as historical categories. The contrast between classical and ‘modern’ physics is perceived in terms that highlight the innovatory features of physics after 1900: the abandonment of the concepts of absolute space and time in Einstein’s theory of relativity, and of causality and determinism in quantum mechanics. ‘ Classical ’ physics is thus defined by ‘non-classical’ physics. The definitions and axioms of Principia , Newton’s exposition of the concepts of absolute space and time, and his statement of the Newtonian laws of motion, are rightly seen as fundamental to the 17th-century mechanization of the world picture.


2021 ◽  
pp. 161-177
Author(s):  
Steven L. Goldman

Ontology is integral to the two most fundamental scientific theories of the twentieth century: quantum theory and the special and general theories of relativity. Issues that drove the development of quantum theory include the reality of quanta, the simultaneous wave- and particle-like nature of matter and energy, determinism, probability and randomness, Schrodinger’s wave equation, and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. So did the reality of the predictions about space, time, matter, energy, and the universe itself that were deduced from the special and general theories of relativity. Dirac’s prediction of antimatter based solely on the mathematics of his theory of the electron and Pauli’s prediction of the neutrino based on his belief in quantum mechanics are cases in point. Ontological interpretations of the uncertainty principle, of quantum vacuum energy fields, and of Schrodinger’s probability waves in the form of multiple universe theories further illustrate this point.


Author(s):  
Espen Haug

In this paper we will show that standard physics to a large degree consists of derivatives of a deeper reality. This means standard physics is both overly complex and also incomplete. Modern physics has typically started from working with first understanding the surface of the world, that is typically the macroscopic world, and then forming theories about the atomic and subatomic world. And we did not have much of a choice, as the subatomic world is very hard to observe directly, if not impossible to observe directly at the deepest level. Despite the enormous success of modern physics, it is therefore no big surprise that we at some point have possibly taken a step in the wrong direction. We will claim that one such step came when one thought that the de Broglie wavelength represented a real matter wavelength. We will claim that the Compton wavelength is the real matter wavelength. Based on such a view we will see that many equations in modern physics are only derivatives of much simpler relations. Second, we will claim that in today’s physics one uses two different mass definitions, one mass definition that is complete or at least more complete, embedded in gravity equations without being aware of it, as it is concealed in GM, and the standard, but incomplete, kg mass definition in non-gravitational physics. First, when this is understood, and one uses the more complete mass definition that is embedded in gravity physics, not only in gravity physics, but in all of physics, then one has a chance to unify gravity and quantum mechanics. Our new theory shows that most physical phenomena when observed over a very short timescale are probabilistic for masses smaller than a Planck mass and dominated by determinism at or above Planck mass size. Our findings have many implications. For example, we show that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is rooted in a foundation not valid for rest-mass particles, so the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can say nothing about rest-masses. When re-formulated based on a foundation compatible with a new momentum that is also compatible with rest-masses, we obtain a re-defined Heisenberg principle that seems to become a certainty principle in the special case of a Planck mass particle. Furthermore, we show that the Planck mass particle is linked to gravity and that we can easily detect the Planck scale from gravity observations. The Planck mass particle is unique as it only lasts the Planck time, and in that very short time period it can only be observed directly from itself, and it therefore closely linked to absolute rest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document