Quantum Behavior Behind the Classical Properties of Materials

It has long been observed that the behavior of macroscopic objects appears to be classical; however, many of their qualities actually arise from the quantum behavior of their microscopic components. For example, what makes some materials metals and conducts electricity, while others are insulating materials or semiconductors? This is because of the quantum properties of electrons in solids. The thermal properties of solids, such as “specific heat” or “thermal conductivity,” depend on the quantum motion of atoms. When a measurement has its effect, the state of a large number of particles changes together. For example, if the indicator moves on the scale, it means that all the atoms have moved together, and if the lamp is lit, it is because of the mass movement of electrons in the wires through which the electric current that lit the lamp has passed. This mass movement, shared by a large number of particles, is a key feature of all observed macroscopic events, particularly in measuring instruments. So, does quantum theory break down when such mass movements occur? In order to test the applicability of quantum physics in this situation, we will consider the use of the device shown in image 795: here is the usual example of a photon *45 going to the polarizer [H/V]; in which the two paths connect to an indicator moving from its central position O to one of the points H or V depending on the path from which the photon came out. This device is so far in the same position as we have discussed many times before (see image 4x7). The counter-point will vibrate first if the photon exits the V-track. But if the photon exits the two paths together, and if the quantum theory is valid for both the photon and the macroscopic indicator: the final movement of the indicator will be the sum of these two movements canceling each other out, which means that the indicator remains the same. "() If we do this experiment and do not notice any movement of the indicator, we will be sure that the counter-point theory is valid in interpreting the large systems. The theory of spontaneous collapse developed in more detail in the 1980s, and is known as the GRW theory after the three Italian scientists who developed it. These three began with the assumption that atomic particles may exist in "delocalised" quantizations so that they are in a superposition between the corresponding states in different positions, with a nonzero probability; this superposition automatically collapses into one of its specified states or positions. They then pointed out that the collapse of one atom on its own; in an index whose other atoms have not yet been located; would cause that atom to disappear from one superposition, and in one superposition its position would double the weight of that other superposition(). This would inevitably lead to an increase in the system's energy, and there is no source of this extra energy(). If GRW was correct, it would have solved the measurement problem while maintaining the weak reductionism principle, because it is a single theory with a different appearance in the macroscopic context than in the microscopic context. - Alistair Ray. — Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/posts/pfbid02Q65sc5UiGnVMAhheuRJUmPsaNkCAagsWPv8oTzdEoguCTRLcdWrKcjf1fR4BP4Kil