Shedding Light on Pilot Wave Phenomena
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Shedding light on pilot wave phenomena
Dan Harris,
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Victor Prost,
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Julio Quintela,
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
P.-T. Brun,
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John W. M. Bush,
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1...
The reflection of a regular pattern from a liquid surface can be distorted by even the smallest undulations. We here use this phenomenon to visualize micrometric surface waves generated as a millimetric droplet bounces on the surface of a vibrating oil bath. This system, discovered a decade ago by Yves Couder and Emmanuel Fort, is of current interest as a hydrodynamic quantum analog; specifically, the walking droplets exhibit several features reminiscent of quantum particles. Our experiment sheds light on the interaction between the droplet and its guiding wave, yielding visualization of the pilot-wave dynamics.
Selected as a 2015 APS/DFD Gallery of Fluid Motion Award Winner.
See other videos from the 2015 Gallery of Fluid Motion: gfm.aps.org/
Pilot wave theory is what gave me a whole new perspective to see through. I am amazed how I have never heard of it until just recently.
Pilot wave gives incorrect answer to what is observed, i.e. Bells Theorem. Pilot wave gives the answers that one would expect deriving bells theorem mathematically, but in nature there is a statistical deviation from these norms. Until pilot Wave derives a solution to this discrepancy then it is incorrect (not that it shouldn't be investigated further)
Actually, it doesn't give "incorrect answers". The probability statistics it generates are identical to those that the Copenhagen Interpretation generates but the argument against it has been that it requires hidden variables (some sort of underlying medium like the oil above for the pilot waves to travel on and since Maxwell and Einstien proved light doesn't need a medium to flow (it flows through the "vacuum" of space), it was thought that it was wrong - even by the originator Louis de Broglie).
Bell's Theorem just says that there can't be local hidden variables not that there can't be underlying hidden variables. Recent work on that has shown that there is no inconsistency there as long as there is some sort of hidden variable (which of course nobody has found yet). Einstein never quite bought into the Copenhagen interpretation and yet couldn't reconcile the hidden variables required by de Broglie's Pilot Wave theory either. My own belief is that Copenhagen and String Theory both show some neat mathematical tricks to predict behaviours but are not good theories of how the universe actually works. I suspect the answer will be a deterministic theory something closer to Pilot Wave Theory than random chance like Copenhagen. I suspect that sometime in the next 20 years we'll know one way or the other.
where did you get your info ?
if i am incorrect i need straitening out if not you do ether way, let me verify your info because i do believe you are wrong buddy .
bells theorem rules out all possibility of hidden variables that is the discrepancy . in order for pilot wave to be true there MUST be hidden variables,,witch is simply not true
My degree was in Physics and I've followed it closely all my life. There are numerous good books on the subject and lots of good videos on the internet that describe it in detail. You can easily find lots of pilot wave simulations that correctly model the double slit experiment as well as the quantum mechanical picture of the electron on youtube. Those pictures show how the probabilities stack up to the same as predicted by Copenhagen. I'd also encourage you to read Bell's paper on his hidden variable requirements and the recent "adjustments' to the meaning behind his theorem (it's really only applicable to local hidden variables). Good luck in your studies. Understanding our universe is never a waste of time!
The most accepted interpretation of quantum physics is Copenhagen only due to historical reasons, things could have been different. The Pilot Wave theory together with deterministic chaos provides a very enticing alternative. For sure there are still many hurdles in the way, but I hope one day this one becomes the "main" interpretation.
Wonderful succinct video of fantastic and beautiful phenomena often overlooked
Very eloquent!
this inspired the following poem:
Copper bowl, a drop of oil, add a coil
Electrons; push and pull
Wave a hand for added drama…
Magic!
Presonance, resonance, postonance
(Dance projection - past and future)
Bubbles bob, expand and wobble, in and out, jell-o prance
Oil beneath responds in kind, surface rises soft and blind
To caress soft curves vibrating, in response to vibes that bind
Circles soft, meet oscillations, waves combine to speak of terms…
Slow!
Be the God above the plane, do forget your preconceptions
Slow your mind and blink your eyes, see!
“Drop” in flight above the oil, perfect shape, true aim and path
In majestic pre perception of its destiny direction
That awaits your divination as your finger nears the…
Switch!
thank you :)
Maybe the most amazing thing I saw today!
Thanks for great modeling of this super important part of physics and also for the awesome set up details so we can do at home.
Wow, this video is fascinating
I've been doing this in my garage for years... try using multi-frequency tones and some very weird effects and patterns start to occur when you mix frequencies
@Jim Whitehead Would you be willing to post a video of this? I would really like to see it
@@vsaucemichaelhere3409 There is one on youtube, try searching walking droplets experiment high speed camera or something. The experiment ends with different frequencies, the cello one pretty much dominates lol.
It is my belief that the instability of the "lattice" as a function of time is actually natural and harmonic even to the subatomic level. How I have come to understand it is that over time the particles or "droplets" exhibit a behavior not introduced into the system, and that behavior could be choice. Even when the lattice finds equilibrium each particle has this inherent "desire" to be in the center in the model explained to me. Once one particle makes it's "move" even if only a tiny move that decision puts at least one particle out of place by that small move, and given enough additional time the system will collapse as all the particles move in concert to both keep the original lattice structure in tact while simultaneously trying to compensate for the particle that moved out of place and each additional particle that became out of place as a result of the compensational movement. When we finally get some darn droplets that make that tiny "choice" to move out of place but, for it then to also be aware enough to make the tiny "move" back in place so the overall structure stays intact then these droplets can finally find peace and harmony in the lattice structure that is their Universe for much longer. God Bless all of us Particles and Droplets :)
trippy af
Nice 👍
I would be interesting to remove the droplet reflection, and recreate the pattern underneath.
Just my thinking.
Are there details on this experiment and how it was done?
That explains why ultrasonic humidifiers are spreading the essential oil faster into the air.
The water *droplets evaporate faster,* when they jump on the water surface .-)
Can't get the audio on this, despite 20x attempts. Very frustrating.
same
same here
This is beautiful
Trust Google to think of audio second. There is none on this video.
Here some arguments in favor of Bohm:
arxiv.org/abs/2001.07392
2:29 opera singer breaking a wine glass microscopic model?
So you don't like Copenhagen cuz it seems too arbitrary and the Everettian interpretation seems to ridiculous so of course one has to resort to Bohmian mechanics, which is itself arbitrary and fanciful.
Copenhagen has given us the Standard Model of Particle Physics and thus the modern world.
Everett's Many Worlds has given us some cool Sci-fi
Pilot wave THEORY hasn't done anything because it is not a thing.
so are we going back to the ether?? besides this does not explain why there is no interferences pattern when scientist try to measured through which slit the electron goes!!!
+Hellen Laespriell It does in fact explain the observation effect in the double-slit experiment. Look it up and you'll see that by disturbing the pilot wave, observation can, in fact, produce what has previously been referred to as "wave function collapse" or some other such nonsense.
MewCat100 wave don't collapse tho?
Rick, the wave itself doesn't have to collapse. I think you're confusing that with the quantum "wave function" collapsing to a particular outcome. Not the same thing at all. The wave function in QT can be thought of as the amalgam of possibilities of where the particle can be and once measured it "collapses" to reveal the outcome (the cat is dead).
You have to rethink how you 'measure' position. In the quantum realm you do so using quantum objects.
In this model you would have to use droplets in some analogous way.. to perhaps induce a wave collapse.