Below is a light reminder that there is an "observer effect", and an excerpt from the book, transferring the principle of the priority of consciousness from quantum physics to the manifested plane.
"Your life is where your attention is."
It is this postulate that has been experimentally proven by physicists in many laboratories around the world, no matter how strange it may sound.Perhaps now it sounds unusual, but quantum physics has begun to prove the truth of hoary antiquity: "Your life is where your attention is." In particular, that a person with his attention influences the surrounding material world, predetermines the reality that he perceives.
From its very inception, quantum physics began to radically change the idea of the microcosm and of man, starting from the second half of the 19th century, with William Hamilton's statement about the wave-like nature of light, and continuing with the advanced discoveries of modern scientists. Quantum physics already has a lot of evidence that the microcosm "lives" according to completely different laws of physics, that the properties of nanoparticles differ from the world familiar to man, that elementary particles interact with it in a special way.
In the middle of the 20th century, Klaus Jenson obtained an interesting result during experiments: during physical experiments, subatomic particles and photons accurately responded to human attention, which led to a different end result. That is, nanoparticles reacted to what the researchers focused their attention on at that moment. Each time this experiment, which has already become a classic, surprises scientists. It has been repeated many times in many laboratories around the world, and each time the results of this experiment are identical, which confirms its scientific value and reliability.
So, for this experiment, a light source and a screen (a plate impervious to photons) are prepared, which has two slits. The device, which is the light source, “shoots” photons with single pulses.
Photo 1.
A special screen with two slits was placed in front of the special photographic paper. As expected, two vertical stripes appeared on the photographic paper - traces of photons that illuminated the paper as they passed through these slits. Naturally, the course of the experiment was monitored.
Photo 2.
When the researcher turned on the device, and he himself went away for a while, returning to the laboratory, he was incredibly surprised: photons left a completely different image on photographic paper - instead of two vertical stripes - a lot.
Photo 3.
How could this happen? The traces left on the paper were characteristic of a wave that passed through the cracks. In other words, an interference pattern was observed.
Photo 4.
A simple experiment with photons showed that upon observation (in the presence of a detector or observer) the wave passes into the state of a particle and behaves like a particle, but, in the absence of an observer, behaves like a wave. It turned out that if you do not conduct observations in this experiment, photographic paper shows traces of waves, that is, an interference pattern is visible. Such a physical phenomenon began to be called the “Effect of the Observer”.
The particle experiment described above also applies to the question "Is there a God?". Because if, with the vigilant attention of the Observer, that which has a wave nature can be in a state of matter, reacting and changing its properties, then who carefully observes the entire Universe? Who keeps all matter in a stable state with their attention? As soon as a person in his perception has an assumption that he can live in a qualitatively different world (for example, in the world of God), only then does he, the person, begin to change his vector of development in this side, and the chances of surviving this experience increase many times over. That is, it is enough just to admit the possibility of such a reality for oneself. Therefore, as soon as a person accepts the possibility of acquiring such an experience, he actually begins to acquire it. This is also confirmed in the AllatRa book by Anastasia Novykh:
“Everything depends on the Observer himself: if a person perceives himself as a particle (a material object living according to the laws of the material world), he will see and perceive the world of matter; if a person perceives himself as a wave (sensory experiences, an expanded state of consciousness), then he perceives the world of God and begins to understand it, to live it.
In the experiment described above, the observer inevitably influences the course and results of the experiment. That is, a very important principle emerges: it is impossible to observe the system, measure and analyze it without interacting with it. Where there is interaction, there is a change in properties.
The sages say that God is everywhere. Do not observations of nanoparticles confirm this statement? Are these experiments a confirmation that the entire material Universe interacts with Him in the same way as, for example, the Observer interacts with photons? Doesn't this experience show that everything where the Observer's attention is directed is permeated by him? Indeed, from the point of view of quantum physics and the principle of the "Effect of the Observer", this is inevitable, since during the interaction a quantum system loses its original features, changing under the influence of a larger system. That is, both systems mutually exchanging in the energy-information plan, modify each other.
If we develop this question further, then it turns out that the Observer predetermines the reality in which he then lives. This manifests itself as a consequence of his choice. In quantum physics, there is the concept of a plurality of realities, when thousands of possible realities are in front of the Observer until he makes his final choice, thereby choosing only one of the realities. And when he chooses his own reality for himself, he focuses on it, and it manifests itself for him (or he for her?).
And again, taking into account the fact that a person lives in the reality that he himself supports with his attention, then we come to the same question: if all matter in the Universe is kept by attention, then Who keeps the Universe itself with his attention? Doesn't this postulate prove the existence of God, the One Who can contemplate the whole picture?
Does this not indicate that our mind is directly involved in the work of the material world? Wolfgang Pauli, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, once said: The laws of physics and consciousness must be seen as complementary". It is safe to say that Mr. Pauli was right. This is already very close to world recognition: the material world is an illusory reflection of our mind, and what we see with our eyes is not really reality. Then what is reality? Where is it located and how can you find it?
More and more, scientists are inclined to believe that human thinking in the same way is subject to the processes of the notorious quantum effects. To live in an illusion drawn by the mind, or to discover reality for oneself - this is for everyone to choose for themselves. We can only recommend that you familiarize yourself with the AllatRa book, which was quoted above. This book not only scientifically proves the existence of God, but also gives detailed explanations of all existing realities, dimensions, and even reveals the structure of the human energy structure. You can download this book completely free of charge from our website by clicking on the quote below, or by going to the appropriate section of the site.
Nobody in the world understands quantum mechanics - this is the main thing you need to know about it. Yes, many physicists have learned to use its laws and even predict phenomena using quantum calculations. But it is still unclear why the presence of an observer determines the fate of the system and forces it to make a choice in favor of one state. "Theories and Practices" selected examples of experiments, the outcome of which is inevitably influenced by the observer, and tried to figure out what quantum mechanics is going to do with such interference of consciousness in material reality.
Shroedinger `s cat
Today there are many interpretations of quantum mechanics, the most popular of which remains the Copenhagen one. Its main provisions were formulated in the 1920s by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. And the central term of the Copenhagen interpretation was the wave function - a mathematical function that contains information about all possible states of a quantum system in which it simultaneously resides.
According to the Copenhagen interpretation, only observation can accurately determine the state of the system, distinguish it from the rest (the wave function only helps to mathematically calculate the probability of detecting the system in a particular state). We can say that after observation, a quantum system becomes classical: it instantly ceases to coexist in many states at once in favor of one of them.
This approach has always had opponents (remember, for example, “God does not play dice” by Albert Einstein), but the accuracy of calculations and predictions took its toll. However, in recent years there have been fewer and fewer supporters of the Copenhagen interpretation, and not the least reason for this is the very mysterious instantaneous collapse of the wave function during measurement. Erwin Schrödinger's famous thought experiment with the poor cat was just designed to show the absurdity of this phenomenon.
So, we recall the content of the experiment. A live cat, an ampoule of poison and some mechanism that can set the poison into action at a random moment are placed in a black box. For example, one radioactive atom, the decay of which will break the ampoule. The exact time of the decay of the atom is unknown. Only the half-life is known: the time during which the decay will occur with a probability of 50%.
It turns out that for an external observer, the cat inside the box exists in two states at once: it is either alive, if everything goes well, or dead, if the decay has occurred and the ampoule has broken. Both of these states are described by the cat's wave function, which changes over time: the farther, the more likely it is that radioactive decay has already happened. But as soon as the box is opened, the wave function collapses and we immediately see the outcome of the flayer experiment.
It turns out that until the observer opens the box, the cat will forever balance on the border between life and death, and only the observer's action will determine his fate. This is the absurdity that Schrödinger pointed out.
Electron diffraction
According to a survey of leading physicists conducted by The New York Times, the experiment with electron diffraction, set in 1961 by Klaus Jenson, became one of the most beautiful in the history of science. What is its essence?
There is a source that emits a stream of electrons towards the screen-photographic plate. And there is an obstacle in the way of these electrons - a copper plate with two slits. What kind of picture on the screen can be expected if we represent electrons as just small charged balls? Two illuminated bands opposite the slits.
In reality, a much more complex pattern of alternating black and white stripes appears on the screen. The fact is that when passing through the slits, electrons begin to behave not like particles, but like waves (just like photons, particles of light, can simultaneously be waves). Then these waves interact in space, somewhere weakening, and somewhere strengthening each other, and as a result, a complex picture of alternating light and dark stripes appears on the screen.
In this case, the result of the experiment does not change, and if electrons are passed through the slit not in a continuous stream, but one by one, even one particle can simultaneously be a wave. Even one electron can pass through two slits at the same time (and this is another of the important provisions of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics - objects can simultaneously display both their "usual" material properties and exotic wave properties).
But what about the observer? Despite the fact that with him the already complicated story became even more complicated. When, in such experiments, physicists tried to fix with the help of instruments through which slit the electron actually passes, the picture on the screen changed dramatically and became “classical”: two illuminated areas opposite the slits and no alternating stripes.
The electrons did not seem to want to show their wave nature under the gaze of the observer. Adjusted to his instinctive desire to see a simple and understandable picture. Mystic? There is a much simpler explanation: no observation of the system can be carried out without physical impact on it. But we will return to this a little later.
Heated fullerene
Experiments on particle diffraction were carried out not only on electrons, but also on much larger objects. For example, fullerenes are large, closed molecules composed of tens of carbon atoms (for example, a fullerene of sixty carbon atoms is very similar in shape to a soccer ball: a hollow sphere sewn from five- and hexagons).
Recently a group at the University of Vienna, led by Professor Zeilinger, has tried to introduce an element of observation into such experiments. To do this, they irradiated moving fullerene molecules with a laser beam. After that, heated by an external influence, the molecules began to glow and thus inevitably revealed their place in space for the observer.
Along with this innovation, the behavior of molecules has also changed. Before the start of total surveillance, fullerenes quite successfully went around obstacles (showed wave properties) like electrons from the previous example passing through an opaque screen. But later, with the advent of the observer, the fullerenes calmed down and began to behave like completely law-abiding particles of matter.
Cooling dimension
One of the most famous laws of the quantum world is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: it is impossible to simultaneously determine the position and speed of a quantum object. The more accurately we measure the momentum of a particle, the less accurately we can measure its position. But the operation of quantum laws, operating at the level of tiny particles, is usually imperceptible in our world of large macro objects.
Therefore, the recent experiments of the group of Professor Schwab from the USA are all the more valuable, in which quantum effects were demonstrated not at the level of the same electrons or fullerene molecules (their characteristic diameter is about 1 nm), but on a slightly more tangible object - a tiny aluminum strip.
This strip was fixed on both sides so that its middle was in a suspended state and could vibrate under external influence. In addition, next to the strip was a device capable of recording its position with high accuracy.
As a result, the experimenters discovered two interesting effects. Firstly, any measurement of the position of the object, observation of the strip did not pass without a trace for it - after each measurement, the position of the strip changed. Roughly speaking, the experimenters determined the coordinates of the strip with great accuracy and thereby, according to the Heisenberg principle, changed its speed, and hence the subsequent position.
Secondly, which is already quite unexpected, some measurements also led to cooling of the strip. It turns out that the observer can only change the physical characteristics of objects by his presence. It sounds absolutely incredible, but to the credit of the physicists, let's say that they were not at a loss - now Professor Schwab's group is thinking how to apply the discovered effect to cooling electronic circuits.
Freezing particles
As you know, unstable radioactive particles decay in the world not only for the sake of experiments on cats, but also quite by themselves. Moreover, each particle is characterized by an average lifetime, which, it turns out, can increase under the gaze of an observer.
This quantum effect was first predicted back in the 1960s, and its brilliant experimental confirmation appeared in a paper published in 2006 by the group of Nobel laureate in physics Wolfgang Ketterle from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
In this work, we studied the decay of unstable excited rubidium atoms (decay into rubidium atoms in the ground state and photons). Immediately after the preparation of the system, the excitation of atoms began to be observed - they were illuminated by a laser beam. In this case, the observation was carried out in two modes: continuous (small light pulses are constantly fed into the system) and pulsed (the system is irradiated with more powerful pulses from time to time).
The results obtained are in excellent agreement with the theoretical predictions. External light effects really slow down the decay of particles, as if returning them to their original, far from decay state. In this case, the magnitude of the effect for the two studied regimes also coincides with the predictions. And the maximum life of unstable excited rubidium atoms was extended by 30 times.
Quantum mechanics and consciousness
Electrons and fullerenes cease to show their wave properties, aluminum plates cool down, and unstable particles freeze in their decay: under the omnipotent gaze of an observer, the world is changing. What is not evidence of the involvement of our mind in the work of the world around? So maybe Carl Jung and Wolfgang Pauli (Austrian physicist, Nobel laureate, one of the pioneers of quantum mechanics) were right when they said that the laws of physics and consciousness should be considered as complementary?
But so there is only one step left to the duty recognition: the whole world around is the essence of our mind. Creepy? (“Do you really think that the Moon exists only when you look at it?” Einstein commented on the principles of quantum mechanics). Then let's try again to turn to physicists. Moreover, in recent years they are less and less pleased with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics with its mysterious collapse of a function wave, which is being replaced by another, quite mundane and reliable term - decoherence.
Here's the thing - in all the described experiments with observation, the experimenters inevitably influenced the system. It was illuminated with a laser, measuring instruments were installed. And this is a general, very important principle: you cannot observe a system, measure its properties without interacting with it. And where there is interaction, there is a change in properties. Especially when colossus of quantum objects interact with a tiny quantum system. So the eternal, Buddhist neutrality of the observer is impossible.
This is precisely what explains the term "decoherence" - an irreversible process from the point of view of violating the quantum properties of a system when it interacts with another, large system. During such an interaction, the quantum system loses its original features and becomes classical, "obeys" the large system. This explains the paradox with Schrödinger's cat: the cat is such a large system that it simply cannot be isolated from the world. The very setting of the thought experiment is not entirely correct.
In any case, compared to reality as an act of creation of consciousness, decoherence sounds much more calm. Maybe even too calm. After all, with this approach, the entire classical world becomes one big decoherence effect. And according to the authors of one of the most serious books in this field, statements like “there are no particles in the world” or “there is no time at a fundamental level” also logically follow from such approaches.
Creative observer or omnipotent decoherence? You have to choose between two evils. But remember - now scientists are becoming more and more convinced that the very notorious quantum effects underlie our thought processes. So where observation ends and reality begins - each of us has to choose.
The emergence and development of quantum theory led to a change in classical ideas about the structure of matter, motion, causality, space, time, the nature of cognition, etc., which contributed to a radical transformation of the picture of the world. The classical understanding of a material particle was characterized by its sharp separation from the environment, the possession of its own movement and location in space. In quantum theory, a particle began to be represented as a functional part of the system in which it is included, which does not have both coordinates and momentum. In the classical theory, motion was considered as the transfer of a particle, which remains identical to itself, along a certain trajectory. The dual nature of the motion of the particle necessitated the rejection of such a representation of the motion. Classical (dynamic) determinism has given way to probabilistic (statistical) determinism. If earlier the whole was understood as the sum of its constituent parts, then quantum theory revealed the dependence of the properties of a particle on the system in which it is included. The classical understanding of the cognitive process was associated with the knowledge of a material object as existing in itself. Quantum theory has demonstrated the dependence of knowledge about an object on research procedures. If the classical theory claimed to be complete, then the quantum theory developed from the very beginning as incomplete, based on a number of hypotheses, the meaning of which was far from clear at first, and therefore its main provisions received different interpretations, different interpretations.
Disagreements emerged primarily about the physical meaning of the duality of microparticles. De Broglie first put forward the concept of a pilot wave, according to which a wave and a particle coexist, the wave leads the particle. A real material formation that retains its stability is a particle, since it is precisely it that has energy and momentum. The wave carrying the particle controls the nature of the particle's motion. The amplitude of the wave at each point in space determines the probability of particle localization near this point. Schrödinger essentially solves the problem of the duality of a particle by removing it. For him, the particle acts as a purely wave formation. In other words, the particle is the place of the wave in which the greatest energy of the wave is concentrated. The interpretations of de Broglie and Schrödinger were essentially attempts to create visual models in the spirit of classical physics. However, this turned out to be impossible.
Heisenberg proposed an interpretation of quantum theory, proceeding (as shown earlier) from the fact that physics should use only concepts and quantities based on measurements. Heisenberg therefore abandoned the visual representation of the motion of an electron in an atom. Macro devices cannot give a description of the motion of a particle with simultaneous fixation of the momentum and coordinates (i.e. in the classical sense) due to the fundamentally incomplete controllability of the interaction of the device with the particle - due to the uncertainty relation, the measurement of the momentum does not make it possible to determine the coordinates and vice versa. In other words, due to the fundamental inaccuracy of measurements, the predictions of the theory can only be of a probabilistic nature, and the probability is a consequence of the fundamental incompleteness of information about the motion of a particle. This circumstance led to the conclusion about the collapse of the principle of causality in the classical sense, which assumed the prediction of exact values of momentum and position. In the framework of quantum theory, therefore, we are not talking about errors in observation or experiment, but about a fundamental lack of knowledge, which is expressed using a probability function.
Heisenberg's interpretation of quantum theory was developed by Bohr and was called the Copenhagen interpretation. Within the framework of this interpretation, the main provision of quantum theory is the principle of complementarity, which means the requirement to use mutually exclusive classes of concepts, devices and research procedures that are used in their specific conditions and complement each other in order to obtain a holistic picture of the object under study in the process of cognition. This principle is reminiscent of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. If we are talking about the definition of momentum and coordinate as mutually exclusive and complementary research procedures, then there are grounds for identifying these principles. However, the meaning of the complementarity principle is wider than the uncertainty relations. In order to explain the stability of the atom, Bohr combined classical and quantum ideas about the motion of an electron in one model. The principle of complementarity, thus, allowed classical representations to be supplemented with quantum ones. Having revealed the opposite of the wave and corpuscular properties of light and not finding their unity, Bohr leaned towards the idea of two, equivalent to each other, methods of description - wave and corpuscular - with their subsequent combination. So it is more accurate to say that the principle of complementarity is the development of the uncertainty relation, expressing the relationship of coordinate and momentum.
A number of scientists have interpreted the violation of the principle of classical determinism within the framework of quantum theory in favor of indeternism. In fact, here the principle of determinism changed its form. In the framework of classical physics, if at the initial moment of time the positions and state of motion of the elements of the system are known, it is possible to completely predict its position at any future moment of time. All macroscopic systems were subject to this principle. Even in those cases when it was necessary to introduce probabilities, it was always assumed that all elementary processes are strictly deterministic and that only their large number and disorderly behavior makes one resort to statistical methods. In quantum theory, the situation is fundamentally different. To implement the principles of deternization, here it is necessary to know the coordinates and momenta, and this is prohibited by the uncertainty relation. The use of probability here has a different meaning compared to statistical mechanics: if in statistical mechanics probabilities were used to describe large-scale phenomena, then in quantum theory, probabilities, on the contrary, are introduced to describe the elementary processes themselves. All this means that in the world of large-scale bodies the dynamic principle of causality operates, and in the microcosm - the probabilistic principle of causality.
The Copenhagen interpretation presupposes, on the one hand, the description of experiments in terms of classical physics, and, on the other hand, the recognition of these concepts as inaccurately corresponding to the actual state of affairs. It is this inconsistency that determines the likelihood of quantum theory. The concepts of classical physics form an important part of the natural language. If we do not use these concepts to describe our experiments, we will not be able to understand each other.
The ideal of classical physics is the complete objectivity of knowledge. But in cognition we use instruments, and thus, as Heinzerberg says, a subjective element is introduced into the description of atomic processes, since the instrument is created by the observer. "We must remember that what we observe is not nature itself, but nature that appears as it is revealed by our way of asking questions. Scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature on the language we use and try to get an answer in an experiment carried out with the means at our disposal.This brings to mind Bohr's words about quantum theory: if we are looking for harmony in life, we must never forget that in the game of life we are both spectators and participants. It is clear that in our scientific attitude to nature, our own activity becomes important where we have to deal with areas of nature that can only be penetrated through the most important technical means "
Classical representations of space and time also proved impossible to use to describe atomic phenomena. Here is what another creator of quantum theory wrote about this: “The existence of an action quantum revealed a completely unforeseen connection between geometry and dynamics: it turns out that the possibility of localizing physical processes in geometric space depends on their dynamic state. The general theory of relativity has already taught us to consider the local properties of space -time depending on the distribution of matter in the universe.However, the existence of quanta requires a much deeper transformation and no longer allows us to represent the movement of a physical object along a certain line in space-time (the world line).Now it is impossible to determine the state of motion, based on the curve depicting successive positions of an object in space over time. Now we need to consider the dynamic state not as a consequence of spatio-temporal localization, but as an independent and additional aspect of physical reality"
Discussions on the problem of interpretation of quantum theory have exposed the question of the very status of quantum theory - whether it is a complete theory of the motion of a microparticle. The question was first formulated in this way by Einstein. His position was expressed in the concept of hidden parameters. Einstein proceeded from the understanding of quantum theory as a statistical theory that describes the patterns related to the behavior of not a single particle, but their ensemble. Each particle is always strictly localized and simultaneously has certain values of momentum and position. The uncertainty relation reflects not the real structure of reality at the level of microprocesses, but the incompleteness of quantum theory - it’s just that at its level we are not able to simultaneously measure momentum and coordinate, although they actually exist, but as hidden parameters (hidden within the framework of quantum theory). Einstein considered the description of the state of a particle with the help of the wave function to be incomplete, and therefore he presented the quantum theory as an incomplete theory of the motion of a microparticle.
Bohr took the opposite position in this discussion, proceeding from the recognition of the objective uncertainty of the dynamic parameters of a microparticle as the reason for the statistical nature of quantum theory. In his opinion, Einstein's denial of the existence of objectively uncertain quantities leaves unexplained the wave features inherent in a microparticle. Bohr considered it impossible to return to the classical concepts of the motion of a microparticle.
In the 50s. In the 20th century, D.Bohm returned to de Broglie's concept of a wave-pilot, presenting a psi-wave as a real field associated with a particle. Supporters of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory and even some of its opponents did not support Bohm's position, however, it contributed to a more in-depth study of de Broglie's concept: the particle began to be considered as a special formation that arises and moves in the psi-field, but retains its individuality. The works of P.Vigier, L.Yanoshi, who developed this concept, were evaluated by many physicists as too "classical".
In Russian philosophical literature of the Soviet period, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory was criticized for "adherence to positivist attitudes" in the interpretation of the process of cognition. However, a number of authors defended the validity of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory. The replacement of the classical ideal of scientific cognition with a non-classical one was accompanied by the understanding that the observer, trying to build a picture of an object, cannot be distracted from the measurement procedure, i.e. the researcher is unable to measure the parameters of the object under study as they were before the measurement procedure. W. Heisenberg, E. Schrödinger and P. Dirac put the principle of uncertainty at the basis of quantum theory, in which particles no longer had definite and mutually independent momentum and coordinates. Quantum theory thus introduced an element of unpredictability and randomness into science. And although Einstein could not agree with this, quantum mechanics was consistent with experiment, and therefore became the basis of many areas of knowledge.
In 1935, when quantum mechanics and Einstein's general theory of relativity were very young, the not very famous Soviet physicist Matvey Bronstein, at the age of 28, made the first detailed study on the reconciliation of these two theories in the quantum theory of gravity. This “perhaps the theory of the whole world,” as Bronstein wrote, could replace the classical Einsteinian description of gravity, in which it is seen as curves in the space-time continuum, and rewrite it in quantum language, like the rest of physics.
Bronstein figured out how to describe gravity in terms of quantized particles, now called gravitons, but only when the gravitational force is weak—that is, (in general relativity) when spacetime is so slightly curved as to be practically flat. When gravity is strong, "the situation is completely different," the scientist wrote. "Without a deep revision of the classical concepts, it seems practically impossible to present the quantum theory of gravity in this area as well."
His words were prophetic. Eighty-three years later, physicists are still trying to understand how space-time curvature manifests itself on macroscopic scales, deriving from a more fundamental and supposedly quantum picture of gravity; perhaps this is the deepest question in physics. Perhaps, if there was a chance, Bronstein's bright head would speed up the process of this search. In addition to quantum gravity, he also made contributions to astrophysics and cosmology, semiconductor theory, quantum electrodynamics, and wrote several children's books. In 1938, he fell under the Stalinist repressions and was executed at the age of 31.
The search for a complete theory of quantum gravity is complicated by the fact that the quantum properties of gravity never manifest themselves in real experience. Physicists do not see how Einstein's description of a smooth space-time continuum is violated, or Bronstein's quantum approximation of it in a slightly curved state.
The problem lies in the extreme weakness of the gravitational force. While the quantized particles that transmit strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces are so strong that they tightly bind matter into atoms and can be studied literally under a magnifying glass, gravitons individually are so weak that laboratories have no chance of detecting them. To catch a graviton with a high probability, the particle detector would have to be so large and massive that it would collapse into a black hole. This weakness explains why astronomical accumulations of mass are needed to influence other massive bodies through gravity, and why we see gravitational effects on huge scales.
That's not all. The universe seems to be subject to some kind of cosmic censorship: regions of strong gravity — where space-time curves are so sharp that Einstein's equations fail, and the quantum nature of gravity and space-time must be revealed — always hide behind the horizons of black holes.
“Even a few years ago, there was a general consensus that it was most likely impossible to measure the quantization of the gravitational field in any way,” says Igor Pikovsky, a theoretical physicist at Harvard University.
And here are some recent articles published in Physical Review Letters that have changed the situation. These papers make the claim that it might be possible to get to quantum gravity—even without knowing anything about it. The papers, written by Sugato Bose of University College London and Chiara Marletto and Vlatko Vedral of the University of Oxford, propose a technically complex but feasible experiment that could confirm that gravity is a quantum force like all the others, without requiring the discovery of a graviton. Miles Blancow, a quantum physicist at Dartmouth College who was not involved in the work, says that such an experiment could detect a clear trace of invisible quantum gravity—the “Cheshire Cat smile.”
The proposed experiment will determine whether two objects — the Bose group is planning to use a pair of microdiamonds — can become quantum mechanically entangled with each other in a process of mutual gravitational attraction. Entanglement is a quantum phenomenon in which particles become inseparably entwined, sharing a single physical description that defines their possible combined states. (The coexistence of different possible states is called a "superposition" and defines a quantum system.) For example, a pair of entangled particles can exist in a superposition in which particle A will spin up with a 50 percent chance, and B with a top down, and vice versa with a 50 percent chance. No one knows in advance what result you will get when measuring the direction of particle spin, but you can be sure that it will be the same for them.
The authors argue that two objects in the proposed experiment can become entangled in this way only if the force acting between them - in this case gravity - is a quantum interaction mediated by gravitons, which can support quantum superpositions. "If an experiment is carried out and entanglement is obtained, according to the work, one can conclude that gravity is quantized," Blankow explained.
confuse the diamond
Quantum gravity is so subtle that some scientists have questioned its existence. Renowned mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson, 94, has been arguing since 2001 that the universe can support a kind of “dualistic” description in which “the gravitational field described by Einstein’s general theory of relativity would be a purely classical field without any quantum behavior.” , while all matter in this smooth space-time continuum will be quantized by particles that obey the rules of probability.
Dyson, who helped develop quantum electrodynamics (the theory of interactions between matter and light) and is a professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, does not believe that quantum gravity is necessary to describe the unreachable interiors of black holes. And he also believes that the discovery of a hypothetical graviton may be impossible in principle. In that case, he says, quantum gravity would be metaphysical, not physical.
He is not the only skeptic. Noted English physicist Sir Roger Penrose and Hungarian scientist Lajos Diosi independently proposed that spacetime cannot support superpositions. They believe that its smooth, rigid, fundamentally classical nature prevents it from bending into two possible paths at the same time - and it is this rigidity that causes superpositions of quantum systems like electrons and photons to collapse. “Gravitational decoherence,” they argue, allows for a single, solid, classical reality to happen that can be felt on a macroscopic scale.
The possibility of finding the "smile" of quantum gravity would seem to disprove Dyson's argument. It also kills the theory of gravitational decoherence by showing that gravity and spacetime do indeed support quantum superpositions.
Bose and Marletto's proposals appeared simultaneously and completely by accident, although experts note that they reflect the spirit of the times. Quantum physics experimental labs around the world are putting ever larger microscopic objects into quantum superpositions and optimizing protocols for testing the entanglement of two quantum systems. The proposed experiment would combine these procedures while requiring further improvements in scale and sensitivity; maybe it will take ten years. "But there is no physical dead end," says Pikovsky, who is also researching how laboratory experiments could probe gravitational phenomena. "I think it's difficult, but not impossible."
This plan is outlined in more detail in Bose et al., Eleven Ocean Experts for Different Proposal Stages. For example, in his laboratory at the University of Warwick, one of the co-authors Gavin Morley is working on the first step, trying to put a microdiamond in a quantum superposition in two places. To do this, he will enclose a nitrogen atom in a microdiamond, next to a vacancy in the diamond structure (the so-called NV center, or nitrogen-substituted vacancy in diamond), and charge it with a microwave pulse. An electron rotating around the NV center simultaneously absorbs light and does not, and the system goes into a quantum superposition of two spin directions - up and down - like a top, which rotates clockwise with a certain probability and counterclockwise with a certain probability. A microdiamond loaded with this superposition spin is subjected to a magnetic field that causes the top spin to move to the left and the bottom spin to the right. The diamond itself splits into a superposition of two trajectories.
In the full experiment, scientists have to do all this with two diamonds - red and blue, for example - placed side by side in a supercold vacuum. When the trap holding them is released, two microdiamonds, each in a superposition of two positions, will fall vertically in a vacuum. As the diamonds fall, they will feel the gravity of each one. How strong will their gravitational pull be?
If gravity is a quantum force, the answer is, it depends. Each component of the blue diamond superposition will experience a stronger or weaker attraction to the red diamond, depending on whether the latter is in the branch of the superposition that is closer or further away. And the gravity that each component of the superposition of the red diamond will feel depends on the state of the blue diamond in the same way.
In each case, different degrees of gravitational attraction act on the evolving components of diamond superpositions. The two diamonds become interdependent because their states can only be determined in combination - if this, then that - so, in the end, the directions of the spins of the two systems of NV centers will correlate.
After the microdiamonds fall side by side for three seconds—long enough to get entangled in gravity—they will pass through another magnetic field that will bring the branches of each superposition back together. The final step of the experiment is the entanglement witness protocol developed by the Danish physicist Barbara Teral and others: blue and red diamonds enter different devices that measure the spin directions of the NV center systems. (Measurement leads to the collapse of superpositions into certain states). The two results are then compared. By running the experiment over and over again and comparing many pairs of spin measurements, scientists can determine whether the spins of two quantum systems have indeed correlated with each other more than the upper limit for objects that are not quantum mechanically entangled. If so, gravity does indeed entangle diamonds and may support superpositions.
"What's interesting about this experiment is that you don't have to know what quantum theory is," Blancow says. "All it takes is to claim that there is some quantum aspect to this area that is mediated by the force between the two particles."
There are a lot of technical difficulties. The largest object placed in a superposition in two places before was an 800-atom molecule. Each microdiamond contains more than 100 billion carbon atoms - enough to accumulate a tangible gravitational force. Unpacking its quantum mechanical nature will require low temperatures, deep vacuums, and precise control. “A lot of work is getting the initial superposition up and running,” says Peter Barker, a member of the experimental team that is refining laser cooling and microdiamond trapping techniques. If this could be done with one diamond, Bose adds, “the second would not be a problem.”
What is unique about gravity?
Quantum gravity researchers have no doubt that gravity is a quantum force capable of causing entanglement. Of course, gravity is somewhat unique, and there is still much to be learned about the origins of space and time, but quantum mechanics should definitely be involved, the scientists say. "Really, what's the point of a theory where most of the physics is quantum and gravity is classical," says Daniel Harlow, a quantum gravity researcher at MIT. The theoretical arguments against mixed quantum-classical models are very strong (though not undeniable).
On the other hand, theorists have been wrong before. “If you can check, why not? If it shuts up these people who are questioning the quantum nature of gravity, that would be great,” Harlow said.
After reading the papers, Dyson wrote: "The proposed experiment is certainly of great interest and requires carrying out under the conditions of a real quantum system." However, he notes that the direction of the authors' thoughts about quantum fields is different from his. “It is not clear to me whether this experiment will be able to resolve the question of the existence of quantum gravity. The question I asked - whether we observe a separate graviton - is a different question, and it may have a different answer.
The direction of thought by Bose, Marletto and their colleagues about quantized gravity stems from the work of Bronstein as early as 1935. (Dyson called Bronstein's work "beautiful work" that he had not seen before). In particular, Bronstein showed that the weak gravity generated by a small mass can be approximated by Newton's law of gravitation. (This is the force that acts between superpositions of microdiamonds). According to Blancow, calculations of weak quantized gravity have not been done much, although they are certainly more relevant than the physics of black holes or the Big Bang. He hopes the new experimental proposal will encourage theorists to look for subtle refinements to the Newtonian approximation that future benchtop experiments might try to test.
Leonard Susskind, a well-known quantum gravity and string theorist at Stanford University, saw the value of the proposed experiment because "it provides observations of gravity over a new range of masses and distances." But he and other researchers have stressed that microdiamonds cannot reveal anything about the full theory of quantum gravity or spacetime. He and his colleagues would like to understand what happens at the center of a black hole and at the moment of the Big Bang.
Perhaps one clue as to why quantizing gravity is so much harder than anything else lies in the fact that other forces of nature have what is called “locality”: quantum particles in one region of the field (photons in an electromagnetic field, for example) are “independent of other physical entities in a different region of space,” says Mark van Raamsdonk, a quantum gravity theorist at the University of British Columbia. "But there's a lot of theoretical evidence that gravity doesn't work that way."
In the best sandbox models of quantum gravity (with simplified space-time geometries), it's impossible to assume that the ribbon of space-time is divided into independent three-dimensional pieces, van Raamsdonk says. Instead, modern theory suggests that the underlying, fundamental constituents of space are "arranged rather two-dimensionally." The fabric of space-time can be like a hologram or a video game. "Although the picture is three-dimensional, the information is stored on a two-dimensional computer chip." In such a case, the three-dimensional world will be an illusion in the sense that the various parts of it are not so independent. In a video game analogy, a few bits on a two-dimensional chip can encode the global functions of the entire game universe.
And this difference matters when you're trying to create a quantum theory of gravity. The usual approach to quantizing something is to define its independent parts—particles, for example—and then apply quantum mechanics to them. But if you don't define the right terms, you get the wrong equations. The direct quantization of three-dimensional space that Bronstein wanted to do works to some extent with weak gravity, but turns out to be useless when spacetime is highly curved.
Some experts say witnessing the "smile" of quantum gravity could motivate this kind of abstract reasoning. After all, even the loudest theoretical arguments about the existence of quantum gravity are not supported by experimental facts. When van Raamsdonk explains his research at a colloquium of scientists, he says, it usually starts by saying that gravity needs to be rethought with quantum mechanics because the classical description of spacetime breaks down at black holes and the Big Bang.
“But if you do this simple experiment and show that the gravitational field was in superposition, the failure of the classical description becomes obvious. Because there will be an experiment that implies that gravity is quantum.”
Sourced from Quanta Magazine
Lesson Objectives:
Educational: to form students' understanding of the photoelectric effect and study its laws to which it obeys; test the laws of the photoelectric effect with a virtual experiment.
Developing: develop logical thinking.
Educational: education of sociability (ability to communicate), attention, activity, a sense of responsibility, instilling interest in the subject.
During the classes
I. Organizational moment.
- The topic of today's lesson is “Photoelectric effect”.
When considering this interesting topic, we continue to study the section “Quantum physics”, we will try to find out what effect light has on matter and what this effect depends on. But first, we will repeat the material covered in the last lesson, without which it is difficult to understand the intricacies of the photoelectric effect. In the last lesson, we looked at Planck's conjecture.
What is the minimum amount of energy that a system can emit and absorb called? (quantum)
Who first introduces the concept of "quantum of energy" into science? (M.Planck)
Explanation of what experimental dependence contributed to the emergence of quantum physics? (law of radiation of heated solids)
What color do we see a completely black body? (any color depending on the temperature)
III. Learning new material
At the beginning of the 20th century, quantum theory was born - the theory of motion and interaction of elementary particles and systems consisting of them.
To explain the patterns of thermal radiation, M. Planck suggested that atoms emit electromagnetic energy not continuously, but in separate portions - quanta. The energy of each such portion is determined by the formula E = h, where 
-Planck's constant; v is the frequency of the light wave.
Another confirmation of the correctness of the quantum theory was the explanation by Albert Einstein in 1905. phenomenon photoelectric effect.
photoelectric effect- the phenomenon of pulling out electrons from solid and liquid substances under the influence of light.
Types of PHOTO EFFECT:
1. The external photoelectric effect is the emission of electrons by a substance under the influence of electromagnetic radiation. The external photoelectric effect is observed in solids, as well as in gases.
2. The internal photoelectric effect is the induction by electromagnetic radiation of the transitions of electrons inside a conductor or dielectric from bound states to free states without escaping to the outside.
3. Valve photoelectric effect - the appearance of a photo - emf. when illuminating the contact of two different semiconductors or a semiconductor and a metal.
photoelectric effect was discovered in 1887 by a German physicist G. Hertz and in 1888–1890 experimentally studied by A. G. Stoletov. The most complete study of the phenomenon of the photoelectric effect was carried out by F. Lenard in 1900. By this time, the electron had already been discovered (1897, J. Thomson), and it became clear that the photoelectric effect (or more precisely, the external photoelectric effect) consists in pulling out electrons from a substance under the action of light falling on it.
Study of the photoelectric effect.
The first experiments on the photoelectric effect were started by Stoletov as early as February 1888.
The experiments used a glass vacuum vessel with two metal electrodes, the surface of which was thoroughly cleaned. A voltage was applied to the electrodes U, the polarity of which could be changed using a double key. One of the electrodes (cathode K) was illuminated through a quartz window with monochromatic light of a certain wavelength?. At a constant luminous flux, the dependence of the photocurrent strength was taken I from the applied voltage.
Laws of the photoelectric effect
The saturation photocurrent is directly proportional to the incident light flux.
the maximum kinetic energy of photoelectrons increases linearly with the frequency of light and does not depend on its intensity.
For each substance, there is a minimum set frequency, called the red limit of the photoelectric effect, below which the photoelectric effect is not possible.
According to M. Planck's hypothesis, an electromagnetic wave consists of individual photons and radiation occurs discontinuously - by quanta, photons. Thus, the absorption of light must also occur discontinuously - photons transfer their energy to the atoms and molecules of the substance as a whole.
- Einstein's equation for the photoelectric effect
mv 2 /2 = eU 0 - the maximum value of the kinetic energy of the photoelectron;
is the minimum frequency of light at which the photoelectric effect is possible;
V max \u003d hc / Aout - the maximum frequency of light at which the photoelectric effect is possible
- red border photo effect
- photon momentum
Conversation with clarification of terms and concepts.
The phenomenon of the emission of electrons by a substance under the influence of light is called ...
The number of electrons ejected by light from the surface of a substance in 1 s is directly proportional to ...
The kinetic energy of photoelectrons increases linearly with ... and does not depend on ...
For each substance, there is the smallest frequency of light at which the photoelectric effect is still possible. This frequency is called...
The work that must be done to eject electrons from the surface of a substance is called...
Einstein's equation for the photoelectric effect (formulation)…
IV. Consolidation and generalization of knowledge.
Task 1. What is the lowest frequency of light at which the photoelectric effect is still observed if the work function of an electron from a metal is 3.3 * 10 -19 J?
Task 2. Determine the energy, mass and momentum of a photon corresponding to the longest and shortest waves of the visible part of the spectrum?
Decision:
Task 3. Find the photoelectric effect threshold for potassium if the work function A = 1.32 eV?
Decision:
To Einstein's equation 
Using the formulas you wrote out, solve the following problems on one's own.
The work function for the plate material is 4 eV. The plate is illuminated with monochromatic light. What is the photon energy of incident light if the maximum kinetic energy of photoelectrons is 2.5 eV?
Electromagnetic radiation, the photon energy of which is 8 eV, hits the nickel plate. In this case, as a result of the photoelectric effect, electrons with a maximum energy of 3 eV fly out of the plate. What is the work function of electrons in nickel?
A stream of photons with an energy of 12 eV knocks out photoelectrons from the metal, the maximum kinetic energy of which is 2 times less than the work function. Determine the work function for this metal.
The work function of an electron from a metal. Find the maximum wavelength of radiation that can emit electrons.
Determine the work function of electrons from the metal if the red border of the photoelectric effect is 0.255 µm.
For some metal, the red boundary of the photoelectric effect is light with a frequency . Determine the kinetic energy that electrons acquire under the action of radiation with a wavelength
Prepare a presentation on the topic "Application of the photo effect"
