- #1
Feeble Wonk
- 241
- 44
I suppose a related question is in regard to the fundamental nature of quantum superposition. Does any system in superposition "necessarily" demonstrate interference on a macroscopic scale?
Last edited:
Feeble Wonk said:I suppose a related question is in regard to the fundamental nature of quantum superposition. Does any system in superposition "necessarily" demonstrate interference on a macroscopic scale?
Nugatory said:No. Consider that every particle in a macroscopic system is always in a superposition of something, yet demonstrations of macroscopic interference are extraordinarily difficult and rare. Decoherence provides a pretty good explanation for why this should be so; for a layman-friendly treatment I'd recommend "Where does the weirdness go?" by David Lindley.
Nugatory said:No. Consider that every particle in a macroscopic system is always in a superposition of something, yet demonstrations of macroscopic interference are extraordinarily difficult and rare. Decoherence provides a pretty good explanation for why this should be so; for a layman-friendly treatment I'd recommend "Where does the weirdness go?" by David Lindley.
Feeble Wonk said:The differentiation between the two seems to be frustratingly arbitrary, depending on how you look at it. Hopefully Lindley's book will provide some clarity on the subject.
Nugatory said:Sadly, it won't. It's good, but it's not mathematical enough.
Feeble Wonk said:Ugh. Let me ask you this then... Does this whole dispute ultimately come down to the ontological definition of the wave function?
bhobba said:Unfortunately no. The math is the only real explanation.
Feeble Wonk said:I'm not debating the accuracy of the mathematical formulation. My question is in regard to the physical manifestation of WHAT the math refers to... assuming, of course, that there actually IS a physical manifestation.
Feeble Wonk said:I'm not debating the accuracy of the mathematical formulation. My question is in regard to the physical manifestation of WHAT the math refers to... assuming, of course, that there actually IS a physical manifestation.
Macroscopic observation of interference is a phenomenon where two or more waves interact with each other in such a way that their amplitudes either reinforce or cancel each other out. This can be observed on a larger scale, such as with sound waves or light waves.
Macroscopic observation of interference occurs when two waves with similar frequencies and amplitudes overlap each other. As the waves interact, the resulting interference pattern is a combination of the two waves.
Constructive interference occurs when two waves combine to create a larger amplitude. This happens when the waves are in phase, meaning their peaks and troughs align. Destructive interference, on the other hand, occurs when two waves combine to create a smaller amplitude. This happens when the waves are out of phase, meaning their peaks and troughs do not align.
Macroscopic observation of interference is used in various scientific fields, such as physics, engineering, and biology. In physics, it is used to study the properties of waves and their interactions. In engineering, it is used in the design of structures and materials. In biology, it is used to study the behavior of sound and light waves in living organisms.
Yes, macroscopic observation of interference can be observed in everyday life. For example, the colorful patterns on soap bubbles are a result of light waves interfering with each other. The rainbow colors seen on the surface of a CD or DVD are also a result of interference. Additionally, sound waves can also interfere with each other, creating a phenomenon known as beats, which can be heard in music and nature.