Quantum physics researchers attempt to know more about the unknown


Quantum physics is one of the most complex fields of research mostly due to the fact that there is still so much that is not known about quantum physics itself.

This world of quantum mechanics is so complex that people, who have studied this world of shadow for their entire academic career, still have no idea how quantum mechanics work.

Yet, this is what makes quantum mechanics so unique and so important. If someone could unlock the world of quantum mechanics, the world, and the universe, would significantly change forever.

The current quantum mechanical model is random, particles can be in different place, time, or dimension and nobody seems to know why.However, a recently new discovery suggests that this random world of quantum physics is not so random after all.

Using a process called entanglement, where two photons are essentially programed to share the same properties over any distance of space, researchers believed they had found faults in the foundation of quantum theory.

The researches then fired one of the entangled photons into the famous double slit experiment, which shows that light acts as a wave and a particle.

The experiment showed a different pattern than the observers expected, which lead them to believe that the entire model of quantum physics may be wrong! This would mean the universe is not random and that it is possible to predict these quantum properties.

This would be an amazing breakthrough in science, however there continues to be debate about the legitimacy of these recent findings by experts in the science community.

A recurring argument in this debate is that there is not enough clear data, and the legitimacy of the source is also questionable by doubters, and the data appears to be more inconclusive than conclusive. For instance, 0.09% of the acquired data supports their new model while the remaining supports the old theory.

What the article should delve into more is what these results tell us about entanglement rather than some other highly untested and unproven theory about how the universe works.

The data that supports the other non-standard model is; however, worthy of some merit if they can find a way to reproduce this pattern. This would help better understand the randomness of quantum mechanics. It is that this group either falsified or simply did not collect data correctly. While this is likely it is more likely that they witness some sort of entanglement phenomenon.

The point is that despite sounding like a huge breakthrough the article fails to mention the accuracy of the experiment or its legitimacy. Articles like this one on wired.com that are at the crux of quantum mechanical world.

Small portions of data are being blown out of proportion to make it seem like they discovered a whole new way of thinking about the quantum world. When the real discussion should be, what does the data say about what we know and how can we expand upon it to better understand our model.


  1. You will recognize that all theories of math and physics have the following structure: (1) If these assumptions hold then (2) you will get these results.

    Interestingly, physics people appear to never think of the assumptions anymore. They keep talking about results, experiments, data, and confusions about them.

    But you know that nature and also engineering cannot and do not make any assumptions. Therefore items in one will not be valid, and so naturally, you will not get the results. Take for example Newton’s first law, which says: (a) In an isolated environment (b) an object will continue in motion with constant speed in a straight line.

    I am sure you have not seen such an object on earth or in space, naturally, because isolated environment is not possible. Gravitational field is there everywhere in the universe. In the same way it can be shown that both QM and SR have assumptions which are invalid in nature. And there are peer reviewed publications to support their invalidity.

    QM has many assumptions: (a) It is based on probability, which is not there in nature. Life can be precisely predicted moment by moment and also for long term, by any high level yogi. Take a look at the destiny chapter in https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/ (b) Probability is based on infinity, which is also not there in nature. (c) The foundation of QM is based on Uncertainty Principle (UP). UP is based on Fourier Transform (FT), which in turn is defined by infinity. (d) QM assumes particles are waves based on the dual slit experiment (DSE). DSE assumes that it shoots a stream of single particles. There is no engineering technology to generate such a single-particle-stream. Take a look at the QM chapter in the above free book.

Leave a Reply