Author: Jeesung Lee
Subheading: The Universe is composed of many different materials. But what might those materials have in common? It is that those are all composed of the smallest units called quanta, which is also a rising scientific field nowadays. In this article, I would like to introduce the most controversial topic in quantum mechanics: the Copenhagen Interpretation.
Science has always been a friend of humanity. We overcame our technological limitations with the assistance of science, the language of nature. Because many people started learning and adapting science as their tool of invention, we were able to experience substantial development in technology over the past 5,000 years. Those people are called scientists. Yet it is true to say that scientists have tamed a variety of fields in science, from the late 1800s to nowadays, there is one scientific field that is still not fully understood by them. It is called quantum mechanics.
Unlike macrophysical studies like astronomy or Newtonian mechanics, quantum theories lie on the side of microphysics, just like atomic physics. In fact, those two studies have a lot of intersections, since quantum deals a lot with photons and atoms. The interesting characteristic of microphysics is that it can scientifically explain and demonstrate phenomena that are impossible to exist in macrophysics. One of the most well-known of those kinds is the Copenhagen Interpretation, a set of quantum theories that are unexplainable by standard mechanics. For example, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle states that a particle’s location and momentum cannot simultaneously be measured. Followed by the theory that is impossible to be elaborated on, multiple scientists argued against it while others also agreed with the interpretation.
Someone who questioned the correctness of the Copenhagen Interpretation was Albert Einstein. The irony here is that the foundation of quantum mechanics was first insisted on by Albert Einstein. In a 1905 research paper, Einstein proved that all materials are composed of particles called quanta, which are even smaller than the familiar subatomic particles, protons and neutrons. His profound investigation later opened a new gate of quantum mechanics to scientists. However, Einstein was different. He kept doubting the existence of quantum theory, which governs all physical phenomena in microunits. The reason why he renounced quantum theory is interesting: it is that quantum theory violated his philosophical ethics. Einstein was known as a determinist, which are people who believe that every physical event has a definite cause and a predictable outcome. In a similar sense, quantum theory did not fit the deterministic ideals since it was ‘unpredictable’. In fact, Einstein said a familiar phrase to explain his perceptions: “God does not throw dice”. It proves how he thought that the uncertainty of quantum phenomena violates deterministic values.
Yet, after Einstein’s initial findings, Bohr argued against Einstein that quantum theory describes reality in a scientific way, mentioning that quanta are applicable in real life. One of the pieces of evidence he used to support the theory was Hydrogen Spectral Lines. This goes back to simple chemistry, where we learn about energy levels and emissions. In high school chemistry classes, we learn about the basic concept of quantum numbers, which specifies the existence of electrons in certain ranges corresponding to each orbital. Accordingly, the simplified version of the atomic model, which includes information on these quantized orbitals, is known as Bohr’s planetary model. Later, Bohr’s approach to the atomic particles connected to the idea that atomic emissions possess specific frequencies. This fundamental understanding was crucial for one of the most significant experiments in quantum mechanics: the double-slit experiment. This experiment proved that those frequencies of emissions, also known as light, could sometimes be measured as particles called photons. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle also relates to this theory, that the location and momentum of quanta cannot be determined simultaneously. In other terms, this phenomenon connects with the superposition characteristic of quantum particles.
Einstein and Bohr’s argument over the existence of quantum theories was so intense that even some scientists call it the Einstein-Bohr Debate. Then what other scientists had a perception toward the Copenhagen Interpretation? Erwin Schrödinger, who is also a renowned physicist like Einstein, objected to quantum theory. Moreover, he proceeded to make a conceptual model that satirized quantum theory: Schrödinger's Cat. As a familiar term, Schrödinger’s Cat is a conceptual experiment that insists that if we cage a cat inside a box and emit radiotoxic materials, we cannot know if the cat is dead or alive before we look at it. Schrödinger then claimed the absurdness of the Copenhagen Interpretation by mentioning that the cat is in a superpositional state before we confirm its death by looking at it, where it is neither alive nor dead. Yet, knowing that Schrödinger's wave equations later worked as a crucial part of proving that quantum mechanics is valid, it is quite ironic to consider him a scientist who fully stood against quantum theory.
Reassuring that quantum theory is yet incomplete, it is significant to realize the past studies of the first quantum physicists. Also, it is our work to scrutinize through the unknown study of quanta with passion and interest. Hoping that future physicists would lean their interest on quantum mechanics, I will end my sentences here.
Reference:
Bottom Science. (2023, July 22). Einstein’s “God does not play dice” with the Universe: Explained. Bottom Science. https://www.bottomscience.com/einsteins-god-does-not-play-dice-with-the-universe-explained/#:~:text=Conclusion-,Einstein’s%20famous%20quote%20%E2%80%9CGod%20does%20not%20play%20dice%20with%20the,be%20predicted%20with%20complete%20accuracy.
Einstein, A., Havas, P., & Beck, A. (1987). The collected papers of Albert Einstein: English translation. Princeton University Press.
Ford, K. W. (2018). Niels Bohr’s first 1913 paper: Still relevant, still exciting, still puzzling. The Physics Teacher, 56(8), 500–502. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5064553
Comentários