Register in advance for this meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZcocu-grT4rGNW4MynfpTdbxUlqcr02HLLI
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.
Copenhagen Revisited: An Examination of Quantum Weirdness
by Peter Chapman
Summary: At the Solvay conference 1911 and subsequent conference through to 1927, a quantum theory based on then recent experiments was developed. It is known as the Copenhagen interpretation. It attempted to explain some of the seemingly bizarre and contradictory results of experiments. In doing so it created a new theory which to many survives to this day, despite some new thinking and experiments. More significantly it contradicts our sense of reality.
A number of well respected scientists, including Eistein, did not accept Copenhagen and continued to challenge its many tenets.
After sixty years of studying quantum theory as a hobbyist I have reached a number of conclusions related to the limitations of observability in the quantum world. I will examine the contradictions, the limits of some of the experiments and question some of the seemingly intractable ideas that many scientists refuse to challenge.
I will explain that Heisenberg was not in fact uncertain, Schrodinger did not have a cat that was in a suspended state of being neither alive nor dead until observed or that spooky action at a distance is something that can be used to communicate. I will conclude by questioning the feasibility of using quantum to create a massively parallel computer, this being the holy grail of quantum investment today.
I will avoid complex mathematical models which seem to support and obfuscate reality. The talk will be general interest, not theoretical, academic or technical.
I will mention briefly some of the literature that contradicts the established theory.
Bio: I am an electrical engineer. I have studied quantum physics a as hobbyist for most of my adult life having challenged it as an electrical engineering undergraduate.. I have never accepted many of the tenets of the Copenhagen interpretation and in this talk I will explain why. I will do this by taking a “Sherlock Holmes” i.e. evidence based approach. My presentation is the result of having studied the writings of David Bohm, John Bell, Richard Feynman, Stephen Hawkins, Brian Greene, Milo Wolff and others.
Foresight Synergy Network (FSN) 