Decoherence

Decoherence – the blossom of just one state in macrocosm out of infinite quantum superposition states in micro scale.

We see the world in one definite state. A universe in superposition of states would be an in-deterministic and chaotic world that nobody could stand it. Nothing would remain to rely on or build into it. Even we ourselves would be a total mess. As mixed up as the state that our mind normally is. The proponents of the Decoherence Principle explain why we do not observe superposition of state in our everyday experience. Decoherence principle simply points to the fact that each particle normally exist in an environment. This environment is always bombarded with other particles and photons. The interaction of particles with each other takes them out of super position of state and leaves them in a definite state. That is how the world comes out of confusion and we see one definite state around us.This is a world where we can live and be able to rely on.

State reduction at the margin of the wavelength

Perhaps a better explanation can be obtained by paying attention to the fact that quantum behavior is demonstrated inside the wavelength of each object.

The wavelengths of smaller particles are big enough for us to experimentally observe their superposition of states. The bigger objects on the other hand have a very small and almost undistinguishable wavelength. In this view, the superposition of states takes place within the wavelength of bigger objects.

Singularity, Super Position Domain

If we cannot normally observe the superposition, then where is the most probable place to comprehend it? Where can we find such a cat, which is in superposition of life and death? We assumed singularity to contain information of an object but lacking matter itself. In such a domain, information about any possibility can exist simultaneously. In particle-wave model, I assumed the alternative position of objects in singularity and space-time domain. We can leave superposition of states to singularity and the definite state to space-time. This is how we can avoid the super position conflict with the conservation law.

According to the concept presented, the physical world connects and intermingles with singularity in every miniscule of space. In addition, we have assumed quantum arena (the realm within the wavelength) the interface between our physical world and singularity.

Mind a model for superposition of states

Are we accustomed to superposition of states or is it completely strange to us? Surprisingly, superposition can happen in our mind as well. We are very familiar with superposition of states. In different mind activities such as predicting upcoming events, we imagine different states of proceedings in order to compare and evaluate. When we are planning to make a decision, we picture different mode of possibilities. When we make our decision materializes and the outcome will be just one state.

As a matter of fact, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics as first introduced by Neils Bohr implies that superposition of states is a mathematical formalism and exists in the mind of observer. Physical world is the reduced state of the superposition that exists in our mind. So we reduce the super position to one possibility and somehow project it into physical world. See how all of these fall together as different pieces of the same puzzle. Please refer to the three circles of reality presented at the Introduction Chapter. 

Singularity as an informational domain can contain a superposition of states just like our consciousness, which can hold such a superposition. When the particle enters the objective space-time, it is reduced to one state and becomes observable.

Defying the Conservation Law

As mentioned before, if we take superposition as actual objective phenomena, it turns out to be against the dearly loved conservation of energy/matter law. Many discussions and arguments are brought forward by trying to expand super position of states to macroscopic world. One of the main arguments is the many worlds of Everett presented at 1957. It essentially says that for any possible state of any quantum system a new universe will start which accommodates that particular state. Although this interpretation is revoltingly against conservation law and grossly non-economical and beyond belief, it has gained popularity.

In the Consistent History approach to quantum mechanics by Griffith, Omness and Gell-mann/Hartle the superposition state of quantum level is considered a coarse grained state while a projector reduces and refines it to just one state and project it to macroscopic level. According to them this is why we do not observe superposition in macro world. In 1995 Fay Dawker and Adrian Kent elaborated on the concept further. At least here reduction to one state is recognized while in many worlds of Everett reduction does not occur. In multiverse every possible state starts a new history.

More in the super –position domain

The other dilemma is when and where and in what level this transformation to reduced state is happening. Please note that mathematics of superposition is continuous where as reduction represents a discontinuity and change in state vector.⁵⁶

So the coarse grain (superposition) has to be in a continuous media where as the projected reduced state has to be in a discrete background. In proposed model space-time is discrete and elements in proposed singularity have a continuous nature. So again in my interpretation, the course grain state (superposition) happens in singularity and exists at informational level. The refined and reduced state is projected and materialized to our space-time. So boundaries of space time are where transformation actually happens. This is in line with the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics as originally suggested by Neils Bohr. He believed superposition takes place at the mind of observer in informational state. Reduction occurs when we refine the information.

Do we need to extend the superposition to macroscopic world and then fall into the doldrums of infinite number universes, which are growing enormously by instant? Even thinking about it makes one insane. My humble suggestion is to consider the super position presence somehow out of our universe. Let us then take the state reduction as an event inside our physical world. This way we are left only with one universe. This is in line with our observation.

Here are the main questions: Are we going to take the every moment experience with mind behavior as a main portion of reality and accepting it as model to clarify the obscure portions of physical world?

Or do we keep trying to include implausible fantasies, like many universes or multiple histories (the idea that every event that could happen in the past actually happened) as part of reality? What I am suggesting in here is to find a solution by simply opening out the scope and include a mind like entity as a contributing domain. Just like mathematicians who when they could not solve problems in existing domain, opened out their scope and added negative numbers or imaginary number domains and opened the gridlock.

Observer and Quantum State Reduction

Experiments show that the act of measurement by the experimenter will reduce the super position of state to one definite state. If we open the door in Schrödinger box we find the cat either dead or alive and never both.Is it the measuring or measurer who changes the overlapped different states to one single one?

The founder of quantum mechanics Neils Bohr explains the state reduction,

“We customarily think of the outside world as separate from ourselves, and the boundary between the two is the surface of our skin. However, think of a blind person who gets around with the assistance of a cane. In time that person will probably treat the cane as part of his or her body, and will think of the outside world as beginning just at the tip of the cane. Now imagine the blind man's sense of touch extending out of the tip of the cane and into the roadway itself. Imagine it extending further, down the block, into the countryside, to the whole world. There is no point where the blind man ends and the world begins. Similarly, we can not say which is the system and which is us observing it.”

Therefore, he believed that our body is physically extended through out the universe and we actually are the universe. According to him there is no boundary and we are the whole system.That is why we can affect the world and induce state reduction.

On the contrary, Evan Walker believes,

“…the system undergoes state vector collapse because of our mind. This effort to obtain an entirely practical interpretation of quantum mechanics … lead us to the incredible conclusion that mind, or consciousness, affects matter.”⁸

State reduction is not the only place where the measurer and the act of measuring influence the quantum mechanics. The observer also affects quantum entanglement. In entanglement two or more subatomic particles are connected to each other even if they are worlds apart. If the observer reduces the spin of one of them to a definite state, the spin of the other particles changes accordingly and immediately. Considering the history of particles in the world logically each particle should have countless entanglements with countless particles which it encountered in its past history.

Surprisingly, when a physicist begins the entanglement experiment between a pair of particles any preexisting entanglement is eliminated and just the entanglement between two particles under experiment is observed. So we as experimenters are changing the world even at the quantum level.

Understanding how human can affect quantum mechanics is not easy. It has created many controversies. One wonders, if the principle can be applied in everyday life.Can we change the world at our will? Many new school of thoughts are advocating the idea.

One of them believes that the history and the state of the world depend on our question. We see the answers, which are in line with what we are looking for.Others like Lee Smolin believe there is “one universe seen by many observers, rather than many universes, seen by one mythical observer outside the universe.”²⁷