Noein-or a primer on quantum mechanics

[zaldar]

I've been enjoying Noein on the sci-fi channel though why they also show street fighter I don't understand (I mean talk about showing some of the best and the worst). I especially love the noein episode tonight. Any show that can pull off the line "Becoming an uncertain existence to travel to an uncertain universe might be theoretically possible" and make it sound real is great!

This is even made better by the fact that with my understanding of quantum mechanics I think this is actually a scientifically correct statement. I am however just a chemist rather than a physicist though. (Statements like the above almost made me go into physics though despite my complete lack of mathematical ability.

[Lego]

Anime has the unique chance at throwing out some stuff that makes you go "hmm". GITS Innocence was one of those. While I know some people don't like to think when getting their entertainment, sometimes it's nice to have something like a Noein or a GITS to fall back on.

[Sheena]

I really would not call it a primer for quantum mechanics, mostly just at one interpretation of it which has no impact anyway on the practical and probabilistic use of quantum mechanics. It makes for nice buzz words but little else IMO.

I mean, whichever interpretation you pick (many-worlds, copenhagen, decoherence, transactional), if you have to do ab initio or semiempirical calculations, it'll still be about which HF molecular wavefunctions, operators, basis set and approximations you're gonna pick and how long you can afford to let it run vs how much you'll trust the answer.

It's all cool stuff but someone watching Noein and thinking the world of quantum mechanics revolves around finding answers to these interpretations, just has chosen the wrong field of study. They'd be much better served with a major in philosophy IMO. But hey what do I know? ;)

[BonifaceVIII]

I wish the physics in Gunbuster were real.

Where are you, Dr. Tannhauser?

[Ty]

The plot in Noein, while cool at times, was enough to give me the snores at times. Not that I don't like technical stuff, I just couldn't get over how far they kept taking it. The show's amazing fight scenes make up for it though.

[roastedpekingduck]

While I am a huge huge fan of Noein (it's my favorite show) and do find it cool that Kazuki Akane consulted some physics people while creating Noein, I try to not concentrate on the science parts because "science" in anime is mostly laughable. Noein is a bit more "authentic" in terms of science, but a glance reveals quite a few holes nonetheless. If quantum mechanics in its entirety were applied, Noein would become an unwatchable show though. :P :sd: It's boggles my mind and tickles me to think that Noein could condense all the universes into La'cryma and Shangri La while the universes are still infinitely splitting. Going by quantum mechanics, there'd be an infinite amount of La'crymas and if all the infinite Karasu's and Fukuro's were dimension-diving from the infinite amount of dimensions, we'd be seeing A TON of Dragon Warriors running around. :D Admittedly, it'd be pretty damn cool to see a massive horde of Dragon Warriors fight against a massive fleet of Uroboros.

[zaldar]

The shut up and calculate interpretation of quantum mechanics (which is what you seem to be using here) has never set well with me. Science is based on observation and application, if we can't really say on a macroscale level what the math means I am not to sure it means anything. Until we can decide experimentaly which of the interpretaions is right I don't really trust ANY of the calculations of quantum mechanics (though I do use them in my research). If I was just looking at say the length of a bond in water however you are correct that it would come down to which opperators I would use, and how long I have to wait (hmm 1 week or two).

I also agree the intelligent anime is my favorite type. If I want mindless things blowing up I'll just go watch an american movie.

[BluWacky]

It's boggles my mind and tickles me to think that Noein could condense all the universes into La'cryma and Shangri La while the universes are still infinitely splitting. Going by quantum mechanics, there'd be an infinite amount of La'crymas and if all the infinite Karasu's and Fukuro's were dimension-diving from the infinite amount of dimensions, we'd be seeing A TON of Dragon Warriors running around. :D Admittedly, it'd be pretty damn cool to see a massive horde of Dragon Warriors fight against a massive fleet of Uroboros.

I'm going to comment on this with what I HOPE isn't spoilers for the R1 release (I'm a little behind in my DVD buying!) and I apologise if I accidentally spoil something from the last disc or so, but I think most of this is covered by the end of disc 4. I'll spoiler tag to be on the safe side.

Noein hasn't whittled the dimensions down to solely Lacrima, Shangri-La and Haruka's world; this isn't even the case by episode 20 or wherever disc 4 ends. He has actually mostly been devestating them so that there is no resistance to his plans. At some point (one to which we are not privy in the series, unfortunately) he learns of the workings of the Ouroboros and presumably of the Dragon's Torque, which is the show's McGuffin; it can transcend all the laws of quantum physics, which is what he wants its power for. Haruka has turned back time, hopped through dimensions and released bursts of massive Reiz energy; there's no clear limit to its power. Noein could potentially snuff out every universe imaginable without even the fear of branching if he keeps its power running constantly.

This is partly fanwank I suspect; although Noein is an awesome show, the philosophy of possible worlds is such that it's impossible for anyone to really make sense of it, let alone a slightly odd late-night cartoon series about cloaked people named after birds throwing blue lasers at each other. The last disc should explain things a bit more clearly; I realise zaldar is watching the show on SciFi and I have no idea how far the broadcast has got, but it does stay relatively consistent.

[Dicrel Seijin]

It's boggles my mind and tickles me to think that Noein could condense all the universes into La'cryma and Shangri La while the universes are still infinitely splitting. Going by quantum mechanics, there'd be an infinite amount of La'crymas and if all the infinite Karasu's and Fukuro's were dimension-diving from the infinite amount of dimensions, we'd be seeing A TON of Dragon Warriors running around. :D Admittedly, it'd be pretty damn cool to see a massive horde of Dragon Warriors fight against a massive fleet of Uroboros.

I'm going to comment on this with what I HOPE isn't spoilers for the R1 release (I'm a little behind in my DVD buying!) and I apologise if I accidentally spoil something from the last disc or so, but I think most of this is covered by the end of disc 4. I'll spoiler tag to be on the safe side.

Noein hasn't whittled the dimensions down to solely Lacrima, Shangri-La and Haruka's world; this isn't even the case by episode 20 or wherever disc 4 ends. He has actually mostly been devestating them so that there is no resistance to his plans. At some point (one to which we are not privy in the series, unfortunately) he learns of the workings of the Ouroboros and presumably of the Dragon's Torque, which is the show's McGuffin; it can transcend all the laws of quantum physics, which is what he wants its power for. Haruka has turned back time, hopped through dimensions and released bursts of massive Reiz energy; there's no clear limit to its power. Noein could potentially snuff out every universe imaginable without even the fear of branching if he keeps its power running constantly.

This is partly fanwank I suspect; although Noein is an awesome show, the philosophy of possible worlds is such that it's impossible for anyone to really make sense of it, let alone a slightly odd late-night cartoon series about cloaked people named after birds throwing blue lasers at each other. The last disc should explain things a bit more clearly; I realise zaldar is watching the show on SciFi and I have no idea how far the broadcast has got, but it does stay relatively consistent.

It would be a lot easier with the multiverse whittled down to a few. :sd:

If there are an infinite number of worlds, then it would take an infinite amount of time to enter one world, do your thing, and move on to the next.

As for seeing multiples of various operatives running around... in an infinite multiverse, anything is possible, though in this case, we're viewing one of the ones in the multiverse with only a few operatives. :)

Despite it all, I watch it. I just don't think too long on the concepts being thrown at me. :)

[roastedpekingduck]

Yeah, I still have the last few episodes to go, so I'm temporarily going to skip on that post until I'm finished. :sd:

[zaldar]

but when you travel from one universe to another you also travel in time so the infinite amount of time no longer becomes a problem. As well the people named after birds are no longer human they are quantum entitis what ever the hell that means. So the rules of "normal" human life no longer apply to them. Really the ideas are grounded in quantum mechanics very solidly. Yes this is only one interpretation (and one that I think has fallen out of favor currently) but most of the interpretations of quantum mechanics get very very very strange. The scientists even named a phenomenon spooky action at a distance and generally scientists don't like to give things pejorative names like that. Really reading anyting about string theory, or the works of Hawking is like reading science fiction or anime..

[Sheena]

The calculations are actually unaffected by which interpretation is right.

If you pick the Copenhagen interpretation, you have basically a not very gracious ad-hoc explanation for the observed localization in experiments using probabilities and wave-like behavior. Not very satisfying but in terms of calculations, those correlate (at least for simple systems) well with experiments basically because they were tweaked to agree with observations.

If you pick the many-worlds interpretation, it's much more gracious in theory. The main problem being that you still need to bring in a probability field for branching (since after all we basically live and observe phenomena in the most probable universe in that theory). In turn, that probability distribution sends you back to basically the same calculations than in the Copenhagen model. And also you have an interpretation that is arguably unfalsifiable (each universe being non-communicating with the others) and thus impossible to test for (aside maybe quantum suicide which wouldn't solve anything either since only the subject would know the answer).

Bottom line for those dealing with practical use of quantum mechanics, whichever you pick, you're still stuck with the same probabilistic calculations for different interpretations of what actually happens. That's why I view the debate on which interpretation is right as more philosophical.

Besides I wouldn't hold my breath for a practical experiment proving which is right. Our current choices are an obviously flawed interpretation that somehow works or a great but unverifiable interpretation.

[zaldar]

The calculations may be uneffected but if the calculations are right or not is not to my mind. If we can not understand what the calculations mean for the "real" world than I am not sure how much we can trust the calculations. When science becomes straight math with no experiments or observation I become worried.

I agree though we don't really have a good interpretation yet, though you seem to know more about it than I do. I'm curious on your profile you have editor as your profession...do you edit a physics magazine? You seem to know waaay more about this than I would expect (course I'm in the souther part of America where education is seen as almost completely unimportant..unless your a scientist you really don't know anything about science down here at all)

[Sheena]

I'm curious on your profile you have editor as your profession...do you edit a physics magazine?

Yes, very close. For a science publisher since we also cover biol., chem., mat. science, and engineering. Since I did my Ph.D in physics you can guess how much I edit of the biology papers hehe.

Anyway, IMO the quantum calculations are pretty much hypothesis. They're interesting in their own way but IMO only meaningful when compared to experiments.

Say you find out that the deactivation pathway for DNA nucleotides in water upon UV excitation is on the order of 500 fs (that's relevant in explaining why DNA doesn't undergo more mutation under near constant excitation like we are).

Well, the observable here is that you know the nucleotide gets rid of the energy quickly but you don't really have a clue how and at this timescale, it's pretty hard to do the experiments to find out (passing on the details of the limitations).

But you can try to model the potential energy surfaces (PES) of the molecules in various states. Based on the quantum mechanics calculation of the PES, there looks to be a possible curve crossing between excited states so it gives you a very good hint that excited states of the nucleotides may couple to those of water solvating them to dispose of the energy via basically local heating of solvent, heat which is then dispersed on a longer time scale which you can probe for more easily.

In that sense the calculations served as a springboard for finding out what happens in a round about way. You don't want to take them for face value. You just take it as a hypothesis to devise experiments to test for their predictions. In my perception, it's akin to how you observe black holes. Well, you can't see them directly by definition but you can see what they do to the galaxies around them. You can model speed, heat of gas clouds, etc. to get at the mass and size of the black holes. It's different modeling but the calculations eventually relate to real observable behavior.

My argument about Noein was not that it wasn't an interesting angle they picked (how many anime can make quantum mechanics interpretations and causality meaningful?) but that it'd give people only a marginal view of what quantum mechanics are actually used for practically.

[zaldar]

Ah! Nice, so what is a good book that has a good explanation of quantum mechanics for someone with a Masters in Biochemistry (it can even be one from your company ;).

I agree that chemists and biochemists use quantum mechanics in the way you described. I used quantum mechanics to try and model enzyme active sites in undergrad (didn't go to well) but physicsts are interested more in big picture things are they not? There are still people looking for a unified theory and trying to test string theory (though I have heard string theory called a philosophy rather than a science).

I just get uncomfterable using a theory without really anyone understanding what it means in a physical sense. I have to teach my students that though we use the square of the wave function to come up with the pictures for the orbital the square of the wave function has no physical meaning and that no one really knows what an electron is. This disturbs me.

Man we have gotten off topic now...can someone move the last few posts to the off topic section? I'll post about the next noein here next monday.

[jnik]

If we can not understand what the calculations mean for the "real" world than I am not sure how much we can trust the calculations.
By talking about the "real world" apart from what you call "the calculations," you're asserting the existence of a hidden variables formulation--that there's some reality that's only partially described by the wavefunction. That's one approach, but it doesn't really solve things. Bell's theorem and experiments based on it proves that there's no such thing as a local hidden-variable theory which matches reality.

"Where Does the Weirdness Go?" is a pretty good book on this topic, and Griffiths' "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" is a fine, well, introduction to the field.

[Sheena]

Ah! Nice, so what is a good book that has a good explanation of quantum mechanics for someone with a Masters in Biochemistry (it can even be one from your company ;).

That's a tough one. My main problem with the answer is that there are a lot of books out there that will touch upon the basics but they all go through the math of the regular problems (particle in a box, harmonic oscillator, hydrogen, etc.). That's not an explanation of quantum mechanics but more of an initiation to the systems and calculations.

Overall, I'd go with Landau & Lifshitz's "Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory", over "Modern Quantum Mechanics" by Sakurai. A bit more clear, less math-reliant than Sakurai to explain things.

For a more chemistry bias, I'd go with Ira Levine's "Quantum Chemistry" or "Quantum Chemistry" by Lowe & Peterson. There's still some math but how it applies to molecules and chemistry is definitely something that's not gonna be relevant for physicists.

P.S.: I'm not any of those authors and didn't try to deliberatly push any publisher in particular.

[The Pirate Queen]

Man we have gotten off topic now...can someone move the last few posts to the off topic section? I'll post about the next noein here next monday.

Given the subject matter, it looks topical enough to me. Besides, I'm enjoying the discussion. :neko:

[Dicrel Seijin]

If we use the many worlds hypothesis...

In one world, my head has exploded, splattering the office with chunky gray matter salsa.

In another world, I actually understood all that I just read.

In this world, I'm heading to the library this weekend for some remedial quantum mechanics theory (Quantum Mechanics for Dummies, anyone?) :sd:

Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying this, but I probably would have enjoyed this more back when I was in college and a physics major... but that was another life....

[zaldar]

I am asserting that the math seperate from experiments might not be correct and that the math is not the real world but a model of the real world. The wavefunctions don't have physical existence they are just a model of what does have physical significance.

Don't worry about the math I can understand it (I took PChem) but I am more interested in what the math means.

I do get a kick of telling my students that if we could get them up to faster than the speed of light their wavelength would be noticeable...