Suppose a certain physicist-experimenter has the task of determining the coordinates of a certain microscopic particle, Y1, with an arbitrary accuracy. Can it be done?
Generally, in the work of measurement in the microcosm, Heisenberg's uncertainty, or the limits expressed by the uncertainty principle, are determined. These limits touch certain combinations of microscopic particles that cannot be measured with simultaneous accuracy. But in this case, it is only a function of measuring a simple parameter on one axis. So even the most hardened physicist would say, this is possible without limitations. This work is quite possible.
So, our experimenters start the case. If in the fixed instantaneous T1, he presses a red button while starting the measuring experiment, he will determine the coordinates of the micro-particle X1 with arbitrary accuracy. what will it be? It is important to underscore, that there will be a blurred spatial cloud of probability values, not abstract mathematical matrices, not the transformation of a mysterious function ?, but a solid point on an abscissa axis. This is an accurate measurement result that is localized over time and along a spatial axis of the coordinates.
However, this situation is complicated by the fact that after yesterday's major junk the user has resumed his work to have a strong hangover. It was difficult for him to hit the red start button, so he missed and did not start the experiment. Measuring action was not taking place.
There is no problem. It is possible to measure after a while. Suppose our physicist decided to postpone the measuring task until the time of T2 = T1 + T, where T = 1 min. Since the first task of measurement had not taken place, the situation had not changed radically. Limits have not been set. A new acceptable measurement was made with arbitrary accuracy. If all is correct, the user will get the exact coordinate of the microscopic particle X2. It will also be a point on the abscissa axis, but in another location. Some have already guessed that our physicists are missing the red start button again. Again, the measurement did not take place. He repeats the experiment and misses again at point X3.
Therefore, we will explain the situation. Our experimenter has received a series of opportunities to complete the measuring task at Instant E1. E2.E3 .... N ... with inter-interpolated t. In any of these, he can obtain the exact coordinate of a microscopic particle on Absisa axis x 1, x 2, x 3… x (n)…. Using the fact that in thought experiments, it is possible to allow some manipulative things, we will force a time interval t to be zero. In total, we will get an infinite series on one axis, the spacing of which will reach zero. The points are actually merged into a curve.
What is this curve? It is a diagram of the exact coordinates of a microscopic particle along an abscissa axis within some time interval. Thus, at any moment within this space, there will be a point on a curve, with an exact coordinate on an abscissa axis. To say it another way, each point on this curve can be found if the experimenter starts the measuring task at the appropriate time. Obviously, there is rigid determinism here; There are no loop-holes for randomness and probabilities.
But that's not all. We will assume that our physicist was so clumsy that he has touched the system and spontaneously changed the shoulder of the measuring device from the x-axis to the y-axis. Now all measurements will be valid for the axis of the coordinates. In total, the solid curve with the possible measurable coordinates of a microscopic particle will be obtained again. In our case all axes are equal, so as a result of the same mental move, we can obtain the exact coordinate curve along the z-axis.
So, we have determined three curves with three axes. They can be integrated into a spatial curve that can be safely named "trajectory". If the experimenter performs only one task of measuring on any of the three axes at any time within a given inter-space, he or she establishes a point on this curve (and nowhere else!). On the other hand, each point on this spatial curve can be found if we make a suitable instantaneous measurement in any of the three axes of direction. There is a completely unique correspondence that does not allow for various interpretations.
As a result of experimenting with this idea, we came to the conclusion that the LC curve of the microscopic particle actually exists, is an exact local in space and time, and is easily found with arbitrary accuracy at any point on any selected axis. can go. This is a very regular routine.
Suppose a certain physicist-experimenter has the task of determining the coordinates of a certain microscopic particle, Y1, with an arbitrary accuracy. Can it be done?
Generally, in the work of measurement in the microcosm, Heisenberg's uncertainty, or the limits expressed by the uncertainty principle, are determined. These limits touch certain combinations of microscopic particles that cannot be measured with simultaneous accuracy. But in this case, it is only a function of measuring a simple parameter on one axis. So even the most hardened physicist would say, this is possible without limitations. This work is quite possible.
So, our experimenters start the case. If in the fixed instantaneous T1, he presses a red button while starting the measuring experiment, he will determine the coordinates of the micro-particle X1 with arbitrary accuracy. what will it be? It is important to underscore, that there will be a blurred spatial cloud of probability values, not abstract mathematical matrices, not the transformation of a mysterious function ?, but a solid point on an abscissa axis. This is an accurate measurement result that is localized over time and along a spatial axis of the coordinates.
However, this situation is complicated by the fact that after yesterday's major junk the user has resumed his work to have a strong hangover. It was difficult for him to hit the red start button, so he missed and did not start the experiment. Measuring action was not taking place.
There is no problem. It is possible to measure after a while. Suppose our physicist decided to postpone the measuring task until the time of T2 = T1 + T, where T = 1 min. Since the first task of measurement had not taken place, the situation had not changed radically. Limits have not been set. A new acceptable measurement was made with arbitrary accuracy. If all is correct, the user will get the exact coordinate of the microscopic particle X2. It will also be a point on the abscissa axis, but in another location. Some have already guessed that our physicists are missing the red start button again. Again, the measurement did not take place. He repeats the experiment and misses again at point X3.
Therefore, we will explain the situation. Our experimenter has received a series of opportunities to complete the measuring task at Instant E1. E2.E3 .... N ... with inter-interpolated t. In any of these, he can obtain the exact coordinate of a microscopic particle on Absisa axis x 1, x 2, x 3… x (n)…. Using the fact that in thought experiments, it is possible to allow some manipulative things, we will force a time interval t to be zero. In total, we will get an infinite series on one axis, the spacing of which will reach zero. The points are actually merged into a curve.
What is this curve? It is a diagram of the exact coordinates of a microscopic particle along an abscissa axis within some time interval. Thus, at any moment within this space, there will be a point on a curve, with an exact coordinate on an abscissa axis. To say it another way, each point on this curve can be found if the experimenter starts the measuring task at the appropriate time. Obviously, there is rigid determinism here; There are no loop-holes for randomness and probabilities.
But that's not all. We will assume that our physicist was so clumsy that he has touched the system and spontaneously changed the shoulder of the measuring device from the x-axis to the y-axis. Now all measurements will be valid for the axis of the coordinates. In total, the solid curve with the possible measurable coordinates of a microscopic particle will be obtained again. In our case all axes are equal, so as a result of the same mental move, we can obtain the exact coordinate curve along the z-axis.
So, we have determined three curves with three axes. They can be integrated into a spatial curve that can be safely named "trajectory". If the experimenter performs only one task of measuring on any of the three axes at any time within a given inter-space, he or she establishes a point on this curve (and nowhere else!). On the other hand, each point on this spatial curve can be found if we make a suitable instantaneous measurement in any of the three axes of direction. There is a completely unique correspondence that does not allow for various interpretations.
As a result of experimenting with this idea, we came to the conclusion that the LC curve of the microscopic particle actually exists, is an exact local in space and time, and is easily found with arbitrary accuracy at any point on any selected axis. can go. This is a very regular routine.
The problem will arise when we determine the function of, say, obtaining the exact coordinates of two or more points simultaneously. An important limitation showing the nature of our relationship with micro-relationships is already in operation here. We have called this the "second measurement problem". Twentieth-century physicists have described it with the help of Heisenberg's theory, uncertainty or uncertainty.
There are events in the human experience of the macro world; Events happen in the microcosm. And in our macro world there is a process of presenting the events of a microcosm. It is important to underline that the above problem does not touch upon the events of the human macrocosm and the microcosm. It only touches the process of translation. Here at the boundary of the two worlds, there are major difficulties about which we have already written in the article "Ring Determination and Probability".
It can be described primarily how difficult it is to transfer more than one precise (with arbitrary accuracy) value from a microcosm to a human macro world. How will this happen with other required values? Now while a flaw has been found in our habitual deterministic search method, that inevitably opens the door to uncertainty and randomness. Indirect descriptive - It is necessary in capacity compensation to resort to the use of computational procedures: blurred spatial clouds of probability values, abstract templates, and artificial transformations of mysterious function?
It is important to underline once again, that all these indirect processes have no direct relation to the actual events and processes in the microcosm. These are simply computing - descriptive processes that are convenient for physicists, allowing in some way, to deal with the problem of the presentation of events from one pattern to another. In the above thought experiment, it has been demonstrated that the curve of motion of a microscopic particle (trajectory) actually exists. Furthermore, each point can be found experimentally with arbitrary accuracy. However, it is not possible for us to map this curve onto the diagram with arbitrary accuracy (although broadly it can be constructed in a bubble chamber or an expanding (cloud) chamber).
In this situation the positivist (physicist and philosopher) draws an amusing conclusion; That the trajectory does not exist in the microcosm, that the microscopic particle is not a point object that is properly localized in space, but represents a probability cloud, blurred space and time, and other nonsense.
Physicists, physicists and philosophers, must respond to this ugliness in a strictly scientific way with a different view: physically separating recent descriptive-computational models from reality. Ultimately, this would allow its removal from modern microcosmatic physics already confused with the dominance of the superficial descriptive-computational method, and would lead to a breakthrough in a deeper understanding of the essence of relevant physical processes.
The problem will arise when we determine the function of, say, obtaining the exact coordinates of two or more points simultaneously. An important limitation showing the nature of our relationship with micro-relationships is already in operation here. We have called this the "second measurement problem". Twentieth-century physicists have described it with the help of Heisenberg's theory, uncertainty or uncertainty.
There are events in the human experience of the macro world; Events happen in the microcosm. And in our macro world there is a process of presenting the events of a microcosm. It is important to underline that the above problem does not touch upon the events of the human macrocosm and the microcosm. It only touches the process of translation. Here at the boundary of the two worlds, there are major difficulties about which we have already written in the article "Ring Determination and Probability".
It can be described primarily how difficult it is to transfer more than one precise (with arbitrary accuracy) value from a microcosm to a human macro world. How will this happen with other required values? Now while a flaw has been found in our habitual deterministic search method, that inevitably opens the door to uncertainty and randomness. Indirect descriptive - It is necessary in capacity compensation to resort to the use of computational procedures: blurred spatial clouds of probability values, abstract templates, and artificial transformations of mysterious function?
It is important to underline once again, that all these indirect processes have no direct relation to the actual events and processes in the microcosm. These are simply computing - descriptive processes that are convenient for physicists, allowing in some way, to deal with the problem of the presentation of events from one pattern to another. In the above thought experiment, it has been demonstrated that the curve of motion of a microscopic particle (trajectory) actually exists. Furthermore, each point can be found experimentally with arbitrary accuracy. However, it is not possible for us to map this curve onto the diagram with arbitrary accuracy (although broadly it can be constructed in a bubble chamber or an expanding (cloud) chamber).
In this situation the positivist (physicist and philosopher) draws an amusing conclusion; That the trajectory does not exist in the microcosm, that the microscopic particle is not a point object that is properly localized in space, but represents a probability cloud, blurred space and time, and other nonsense.
Physicists, physicists and philosophers, must respond to this ugliness in a strictly scientific way with a different view: physically separating recent descriptive-computational models from reality. Ultimately, this would allow its removal from modern microcosmatic physics already confused with the dominance of the superficial descriptive-computational method, and would lead to a breakthrough in a deeper understanding of the essence of relevant physical processes.
