Timeline for Heisenberg uncertainty principle and a complete model
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2017 at 21:51 | comment | added | user78445 | I guess if the uncertainty to draw the actual facts of reality from whats measured and the actual reality of things this discrepency maybe balancies out in the quantum mechanical model and its predictions do not differ from what is observed and is thus the model is good approximation to reality but still a model being able to predict the outcome of events is what i object to because this model would be fed with incomplete information and a model that can predict things suggest a deterministic universe which I think is imeasurably impossible to veryfy anyway must sleep now. | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 20:04 | comment | added | Thomas Murphy | HUP-- Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It's definition is built into the quantum mechanical model, so the model itself deals with probabilities. We use the model because it works so well, and for no other reason. | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 19:51 | comment | added | user78445 | sorry I'll leave u alone after this I do not understand your abbreviation HUP but my point is any model can not be an accurate description of what is actually going because despite our efforts to improve the accuracy of measurements you'll will never be able to precisely measure anything because of the uncertainty Unless the quantum mechanical model takes in consideration the difference in perceptual observation and it's inconsistency with what is actually going on. Oh I'm confused I'm gonna retire my thoughts for the present I welcome our discussion though dude:) | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 19:30 | comment | added | Thomas Murphy | The Quantum Mechanical Model has the HUP built into it. It is a VERY good model. So good, in fact, experiments have yet to disprove any predicitions that arise from it. This doesnt mean we are even close to completing the model: there are many predicions that we cannot yet prove or disprove, simply because the energy levels arent high enough and the measurement devices aren't precise enough. | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 19:22 | comment | added | user78445 | Heisenberg uncertainty principle then limits what information any observer can perceive and questions the validity of what we perceive and the truth of what is actually going on. Our perception of events is limited by the principle and any inference about from what we observe and what we draw from it is purely only our speculation and can never be actually proved to be true or not. So again it makes it futile to even bother in coming up with a model because any model predisposes causality and it simply isn't there | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 19:16 | comment | added | Thomas Murphy | The models we use are just that: models. | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 18:50 | comment | added | user78445 | The principle does tend conclude that the outcome of events in the universe is indeterminable and also at the risk of controversy the causality we observe and the use of the models we construct from our perception come into question, and if the principle is correct at least it concludes your fate is in your own hands and we are as the red hot chilli peppers put it " this life is more than just a read through" | |
| Jun 11, 2017 at 18:28 | history | edited | Thomas Murphy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jun 11, 2017 at 18:22 | history | answered | Thomas Murphy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |