I came across some recent papers addressing alternatives to the classic quantum interpretation (Copenhagen view and related). Randall O'Reilly (1) argues that the formulas used in QM should be considered to be calculation tools, not describing the actual physical process, just as Newton was superseded by Einstein in describing gravity. Many paradoxes in QM can disappear when seeing matter as composed from just waves.

A somewhat similar line seems to have been followed by Robert Close (2), although I should admit I haven't read it yet. It's a 163 pages book that can be temporarily downloaded.

The last I like to mention is the work of Edwin Klingman (3), who summarizes some recent theoretical and experimental results that seems to invalidate the classical view of quantum processes

- Surely You Must All be Joking: An Outsider's Critique of Quantum Physics, Randall C. O'Reilly, http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.0880
- The Classical Wave Theory of Matter, Dr. Robert A. Close, http://www.verumversa.com/
- A Physics-based Disproof of Bell’s Theorem, Edwin Eugene Klingman, http://www.geneman.com/pubs/physics_bell/A_Physics_based_Disproof_of_Bells_Theorem.pdf

I actually implemented Robert Close simulation in Java... and it works :-). I did have to change it a bit as one has to integrate over an area on the sphere - it is a local realistic model (but not a "hidden variables" model). Robert Close also has his own simulation in Mathematica:

ReplyDeletehttp://www.classicalmatter.com/Bell/SpinCorrSim.pdf

And the corresponding EPR paper:

http://www.classicalmatter.org/Bell/SpinCorrelation.pdf

I can publish the source code later on for those who are interested...

I read the book (verumversa.com) and highly recommend it! After reading it, it all seems so obvious and simple (and there are no more "paradoxes" as in the current mainstream theories!)

Best wishes,

Chantal