Two physicists are arguing over quantum physics,
one says it can never be understood, and the
other says it is already understood.
So who's right?
Well, they both are, and here's why.
There are certain limits that exist in the
universe, such as the Heisenberg uncertainty
principle, which says that the more that we
know about where an object comes from the
less we can know about where it's going.
There are also four fundamental concepts:
Intrinsic randomness, which says that individual
results are random; Wave particle duality,
which says that quantum objects act like waves
and like particles; Measurement disturbance,
which says that measuring an object alters
the reality of it; and Uncertainty, which
says that there are limits to what can be
known.
Despite all of this quantum physics is still
the most accurate and best understood branch
of science.
An example of this is the double slit experiment.
There are four different models to explain
what happens to the electron from being fired,
to being viewed on a sheet.
There's the many worlds interpretation, which
says that when the electron reaches the slit,
parallel worlds are created and every outcome
occurs, but only one can be viewed by us.
There's the collapse interpretation, which
says that a probability cloud travels through
the experiment and only one option is collapsed
upon when it becomes observed.
There's the pilot wave interpretation which
says that a wave, like a field, exists and
sense everything around it and guides the
electron through only one slit.
Finally, there is the Copenhagen interpretation,
which says that we should forget the models
and only use the math.
All of these interpretations can be calculated
mathematically and all of them give the same
results.
In fact, quantum physics can be accurate up
to 15 decimal places, we just can't conceptualize
what goes on, unless you consider math to
be your diagram.
This is how quantum physics is the most accurate
and the least understood branch of science.
