New Views of Quantum Jumps Challenge Core Tenets of Physics

Quantum mechanics, the theory that describes the physics of the universe at very small scales, is notorious for defying common sense. Consider, for instance, the way that standard interpretations of the theory suggest change occurs in the quantum turf: shifts from one state to another supposedly happen unpredictably and instantaneously. Put another way, if events in our familiar world unfolded similarly to those within atoms, we would expect to routinely see batter becoming a fully baked cake without passing through any intermediate steps. Everyday experience, of course, tells us this is not the case, but for the less accessible microscopic realm, the true nature of such “quantum jumps” has been a major unsolved problem in physics.

In recent decades, however, technological advancements have allowed physicists to probe the issue more closely in carefully arranged laboratory settings. The most fundamental breakthrough arguably came in 1986, when researchers for the first time experimentally verified that quantum jumps are actual physical events that can be observed and studied. Ever since, steady technical progress has opened deeper vistas upon the mysterious phenomenon. Notably, an experiment published in 2019 overturned the traditional view of quantum jumps by demonstrating that they move predictably and gradually once they start—and can even be stopped midway.

That experiment, performed at Yale University, used a setup that let the researchers monitor the transitions with minimal intrusion. Each jump took place between two energy values of a superconducting qubit, a tiny circuit built to mimic the properties of atoms. The research team used measurements of “side activity” taking place in the circuit when the system had the lower energy. This is a bit like knowing which show is playing on a television in another room by only listening for certain key words. This indirect probe evaded one of the top concerns in quantum experiments—namely, how to avoid influencing the very system that one is observing. Known as “clicks” (from the sound that old Geiger counters made when detecting radioactivity), these measurements revealed an important property: jumps to the higher energy were always preceded by a halt in the “key words,” a pause in the side activity. This eventually permitted the team to predict the jumps’ unfolding and even to stop them at will.

Now a new theoretical study delves deeper into what can be said about the jumps and when. And it finds that this seemingly simple and fundamental phenomenon is actually quite complex.

…

There are many areas of physics that have been developed in the past century that would be incomprehensible to a physicist back then… of COURSE they would at least have the tools to begin the long process of catching up on the developments that lead to these new ideas, since the cutting edge of physics must necessarily build on the reality previously established.

But not all areas or concepts in physics can be truly understood by the human mind in the same way as others.

I got to a point where I ‘understood’ newtonian mechanics- I had a good intuitive feel for it, could come up with the right answer in multiple ways- It made sense and I would know qualitatively what the answer would be before doing the pages of math.

Classical electrodynamics also made sense to me- the math was more difficult and a little harder to visualize- but I could see the beauty of it and use it and understand the process and the answers…

Special relativity was harder to feel comfortable with, but eventually I got there, and it was my favorite subject, General relativity I found beautiful, and loved it- I always felt like I was on the verge of understanding something very fundamental about the universe- but it was elusive- for a long time I seriously considered going into pure theory- focusing on general relativity and cosmology- in the end I found the hands on discovery of experimental physics more enticing.

I took many quantum courses, and did well enough but never felt that I understood it- at best I got to a point where I could follow the process, and get an answer- I developed ways of ‘visualizing’ what was going on, but never believed the visualizations were anything more than imperfect metaphors for the ‘truth’ of what was going on…

Quantum electro-dynamics and particle physics I hated- It was like having a recipe book- extremely detailed and fixed rules for combining the ingredients- you could use the recipes to do wonderfully complex and surprising dishes that were without a doubt turning out exactly as they should… but when I was done I still did not feel like I understood anything about the ingredients, or even the true nature of the dish I had prepared according to the recipe…

Entanglement, wave-functions, things that are both particles and waves and neither- the human brain may never be able to truly ‘understand’ the true reality of it- at best we will come up with precise mathematical formulations that exactly calculate the processes in question, and imperfect metaphors and analogies we tell ourselves to ‘understand’ the meaning of it all.

Same with physics. We may not all “get it,” but we will all use it. Physics cannot become too complicated for the human mind, for that very idea limits the capacity of humanity and the advance of evolution.

There may become an issue when we believe we’re too clever for the universe and start designing a new path for evolution which I believe would likely point us toward a dead-end and we’re better than that.

Fundamentally, as Sheldon Cooper stated in on episode of “The Big Bang Theory,” there has been nothing new in physics since Copernicus, and even that was a simple matter of moving a selected number of orbits.

We like to think that science will continue to progress at this same dizzying pace indefinitely, but do we really know that? In spite of phenomenal advances in technology, physics today would be perfectly understandable to a physicist born a century ago. Sure, new discoveries are coming, but could we be approaching some limit, some place where the universe is just too complicated to untangle any further. Maybe the limiting factor isn’t how long we think about it, but how much the human mind is capable of thinking.

I hope not, but I can’t say for sure, and neither can anyone else. What do you think, Zoners? Maybe this is the reason for the Fermi Paradox.