Wave functions and the real presence

[fosio]

According to the latest in quantum mechanics, if something is not observed all of its wave functions are not collapsed and it exists only in a superposition or as probabilistic wave functions. So it would seem that if bread blessed by a priest was later placed in a special box that did not observe the bread in anyway (some kind of suspension), then the bread would no longer be bread but exist merely as probablistic uncollapsed wave functions – wave functions that in principle could end up collapsing upon observation not to a the form of bread but to form of an iPod (very unlikely but mathematically possible in quantum mechanics). But since the real presence depends on the form of bread existing, it would seem that the real presence could only be there when the wave functions have collapsed through some kind of observation. I don’t see this as a problem (though I don’t believe in the real presence). But the interesting thought I had was what if the blessed bread was placed in that special suspension box but then later observed and taken out of the box … it ceased to be in the form of bread but then recollapsed to the form of bread … would it then regain the real presence?

This is just hypothetical of course but it’s an interesting thought experiment.

 

[davidv]

According to the latest in quantum mechanics, if something is not observed all of its wave functions are not collapsed and it exists only in a superposition or as probabilistic wave functions. So it would seem that if bread blessed by a priest was later placed in a special box that did not observe the bread in anyway (some kind of suspension), then the bread would no longer be bread but exist merely as probablistic uncollapsed wave functions – wave functions that in principle could end up collapsing upon observation not to a the form of bread but to form of an iPod (very unlikely but mathematically possible in quantum mechanics). But since the real presence depends on the form of bread existing, it would seem that the real presence could only be there when the wave functions have collapsed through some kind of observation. I don’t see this as a problem (though I don’t believe in the real presence). But the interesting thought I had was what if the blessed bread was placed in that special suspension box but then later observed and taken out of the box … it ceased to be in the form of bread but then recollapsed to the form of bread … would it then regain the real presence?

This is just hypothetical of course but it’s an interesting thought experiment.

Whether one observes it or not, Jesus is substantially (that’s a philosophical term) present in the Eucharist under the appearance of bread (the accidents). His substantial presence remains as long as the accidents of bread remain.

 

[praise_Jesus_1]

“Hypothetical” is right on.

When such a suspension box exists I’ll worry about such problems.

 

[fosio]

They’ve been able to produce these kinds of weird quantum effects for a long time now on a microscopic scale. On a macroscopic scale they have produced them too with actual molecules. But nothing yet on the order of things like bread which are composed of different kinds of molecules.

 

[masterjedi747]

According to the latest in quantum mechanics, if something is not observed all of its wave functions are not collapsed and it exists only in a superposition or as probabilistic wave functions.

That’s just one possible interpretation of quantum mechanics. Other models exist, and this particular interpretation that you make reference to is by no means the favored one, as I understand it.

 

[fosio]

That’s just one possible interpretation of quantum mechanics. Other models exist, and this particular interpretation that you make reference to is by no means the favored one, as I understand it.

I am familiar with two main interpretations: the Copenhagen and the Many Worlds. There is also the fringe interpretation of “hidden variables” but each new experimental result has made the “hidden variables” less and less credible. The latest experiments have just been mind boggling and cannot be reconciled with the “hidden variables” interpretation. I recommend reading the new book “Biocentrism:…” which explains the quantum experiments and how they are irreconcilable with the “hidden variables” interpretation quite well.

 

[praise_Jesus_1]

Well what would happen ‘hypothetically’ if Jesus’ body went into one of these suspension boxes?

 

[Cadellin]

The Real Presence implies that Jesus is really present in the form of bread. If he is present then surely he will be self-aware. If he is self-aware then the bread is continuously observed and therefore continues to exist.

 

[vz71]

I wouldn’t be so certain that this is the ‘latest’ in theory.

Schrödinger’s cat has been around for quite some time.

I have always seen a flaw with these type of thought experiments.
The conclusion that something isn’t until we perceive it to be is assumed. And I find assumption to be something we should never do.

 

[masterjedi747]

I am familiar with two main interpretations: the Copenhagen and the Many Worlds.

Well, here is a (perhaps imperfect) but somewhat more comprehensive list:
Wikipedia - Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Comparison)
…there seem to be variations of even the Copenhagen Interpretation itself.

I wouldn’t be so certain that this is the ‘latest’ in theory.
Schrödinger’s cat has been around for quite some time.

I have always seen a flaw with these type of thought experiments.
The conclusion that something isn’t until we perceive it to be is assumed.

I would have to completely agree with both of those statements… there is no reason to *actually *entertain the idea that the cat is “both alive and dead until observed”, or anything tantamount to that sort of claim… Schrödinger’s thought experiment, in fact, was designed precisely in order to illustrate this obvious absurdity. Whatever incredibly strange things we see happening in quantum mechanics, philosophical speculation still *ought *to proceed in interpreting these events as much as possible in conformity with what we already know about the world. Common sense and everyday experience ought not to simply be disregarded out of hand, in developing *any *philosophical system of reality.

 

[Newbot]

Incidentally, out of curiousity, I have always wondered what ‘observation’ means when this interpretation of quantum mechanics (the Copenhagen, I believe?) claims that wave functions remain probablistic until observed. Usually those admittedly not expert on the subject take ‘to be observed’ to mean “to be present in the consciousness” or “to be perceived by a conscious observer” or something of this sort; but scientists nowadays seem to shirk from statements like this, trying rather to restrict their attention to measurable quantities.

I have (perhaps wrongly) always presumed that ‘observe’ here means ‘measure’: in the sense that the waves have only an indeterminate being until it is forced into some determination by other waves/matter. Similar to the paired quantities that quantum mechanics considers also: insofar as the position of some particular is determined (say by a high-energy light wave) its velocity is indeterminate, and vice verse. This determination would take place regardless of whether a scientist happens to be behind the light wave watching it.

This would be to say that quantum mechanics is talking about reality, and about the actual determination or indetermination of being, regardless of observation in the broader sense. It is also possible that it is doing no more than explaining the limits of our power to observe. In this case to say that velocity is indeterminate means only that we can’t determine it – in itself, it is perfectly determined. This, however, seems contrary to what I understand of quantum mechanics.

I admit this is a slight digression from the subject, but since the question has been raised, might as well be clear on what we even mean.

 

[buffalo]

Catholic teaching is that transubstantiation takes place if the priest intends it.

Perhaps the power of prayer to God and observation together with faith can cause miracles and the miracle of the Eucharist. Perhaps God allows it to work through quantum mechanics.

Interesting question, I have asked this myself.

 

[vz71]

If it is in fact true that the bread and wine do become the Body and Blood of God, then we have to ask ourselves if God is made up of these functions.

Since God exists outside of our universe, the most readily available answer is no.

Accidental properties aside, God does not exist in some flux state until observed.

 

[buffalo]

If it is in fact true that the bread and wine do become the Body and Blood of God, then we have to ask ourselves if God is made up of these functions.

Since God exists outside of our universe, the most readily available answer is no.

Accidental properties aside, God does not exist in some flux state until observed.

Good point.

Some physicists thing that God acts in the world at the quantum level though.

 

[vz71]

Good point.

Some physicists thing that God acts in the world at the quantum level though.

God may well do that. But that does not define what God is, only how he acts.

 

[buffalo]

God may well do that. But that does not define what God is, only how he acts.

I agree.

 

[promethius]

According to the latest in quantum mechanics, if something is not observed all of its wave functions are not collapsed and it exists only in a superposition or as probabilistic wave functions. So it would seem that if bread blessed by a priest was later placed in a special box that did not observe the bread in anyway (some kind of suspension), then the bread would no longer be bread but exist merely as probablistic uncollapsed wave functions – wave functions that in principle could end up collapsing upon observation not to a the form of bread but to form of an iPod (very unlikely but mathematically possible in quantum mechanics). But since the real presence depends on the form of bread existing, it would seem that the real presence could only be there when the wave functions have collapsed through some kind of observation. I don’t see this as a problem (though I don’t believe in the real presence). But the interesting thought I had was what if the blessed bread was placed in that special suspension box but then later observed and taken out of the box … it ceased to be in the form of bread but then recollapsed to the form of bread … would it then regain the real presence?

This is just hypothetical of course but it’s an interesting thought experiment.

Incorrect application of the theory. For each quantum particle, there is a seperate probability function, which is why we have suspension when unmeasured. However, as we consider multiple quantum particles we have to consider the overlap of multiple probability functions. That is to say, the highest probability will become more and more regionalized to a smaller and smaller area of the function with each additional probability function we add into the mix. Thus for something MAYBE as large as a very small molecule, we may still have a probability function (existance in wave form), but anything larger than that is so restricted that it no longer follows the waveform of existance… the overwhelming nature of its overlapping fuctions determines that your bread will always be bread, no matter how long you leave it in suspension.

Probability functions only take hold when they are isolated or few in number

 

[promethius]

Incidentally, out of curiousity, I have always wondered what ‘observation’ means when this interpretation of quantum mechanics (the Copenhagen, I believe?) claims that wave functions remain probablistic until observed. Usually those admittedly not expert on the subject take ‘to be observed’ to mean “to be present in the consciousness” or “to be perceived by a conscious observer” or something of this sort; but scientists nowadays seem to shirk from statements like this, trying rather to restrict their attention to measurable quantities.

I have (perhaps wrongly) always presumed that ‘observe’ here means ‘measure’: in the sense that the waves have only an indeterminate being until it is forced into some determination by other waves/matter. Similar to the paired quantities that quantum mechanics considers also: insofar as the position of some particular is determined (say by a high-energy light wave) its velocity is indeterminate, and vice verse. This determination would take place regardless of whether a scientist happens to be behind the light wave watching it.

This would be to say that quantum mechanics is talking about reality, and about the actual determination or indetermination of being, regardless of observation in the broader sense. It is also possible that it is doing no more than explaining the limits of our power to observe. In this case to say that velocity is indeterminate means only that we can’t determine it – in itself, it is perfectly determined. This, however, seems contrary to what I understand of quantum mechanics.

I admit this is a slight digression from the subject, but since the question has been raised, might as well be clear on what we even mean.

It would depend on what was being measured. For example, Schroedinger’s cat. I’m only measuring to see if the cat is alive or dead. I can do this with my bare eyes, and so simply by looking at the cat I can see which of the two probabilities that it is and therefore collapse the wavefunction.

However, for an electron on a probability curve, I cannot see that with the naked eye. As such, I have no way of determining the current location of the electron without some form of measuring equipment.

In other words, it’s when you try to treat the probability function as though it is a discreet result and then try to measure that discreet result, that the probability function complies nicely and collapses into a nice discreet package… until you have the means to test for a discreet result and attempt to do so, however, the probability function happily ignores you and goes on about it’s superpositioning ways.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

According to the latest in quantum mechanics, if something is not observed all of its wave functions are not collapsed and it exists only in a superposition or as probabilistic wave functions. So it would seem that if bread blessed by a priest was later placed in a special box that did not observe the bread in anyway (some kind of suspension), then the bread would no longer be bread but exist merely as probablistic uncollapsed wave functions – wave functions that in principle could end up collapsing upon observation not to a the form of bread but to form of an iPod (very unlikely but mathematically possible in quantum mechanics). But since the real presence depends on the form of bread existing, it would seem that the real presence could only be there when the wave functions have collapsed through some kind of observation. I don’t see this as a problem (though I don’t believe in the real presence). But the interesting thought I had was what if the blessed bread was placed in that special suspension box but then later observed and taken out of the box … it ceased to be in the form of bread but then recollapsed to the form of bread … would it then regain the real presence?

This is just hypothetical of course but it’s an interesting thought experiment.

Perhaps God observes the host at all times and keeps the wave functions collapsed.

 

[masterjedi747]

Incorrect application of the theory. For each quantum particle, there is a separate probability function, which is why we have suspension when unmeasured. However, as we consider multiple quantum particles we have to consider the overlap of multiple probability functions. That is to say, the highest probability will become more and more regionalized to a smaller and smaller area of the function with each additional probability function we add into the mix. Thus for something MAYBE as large as a very small molecule, we may still have a probability function (existence in wave form), but anything larger than that is so restricted that it no longer follows the waveform of existence… the overwhelming nature of its overlapping functions determines that your bread will always be bread, no matter how long you leave it in suspension.

Probability functions only take hold when they are isolated or few in number

Thanks for the clarification. That definitely helped clear a few things up for me.