[Virtual State (OP)]

Are large objects subject to the Measurement Problem? If so, is it the uncertainty of the individual atoms and not the whole object? If it is the whole object, is it because it using Vector for Momentum?

Do scalar volumes use the vector field for direction (velocity, acceleration, momentum, path)? Is physical matter considered scalar volumes? Could uncertainty be from scalar volumes using vector?

Is the energy associated with light from vector momentum to scalar energy?

Is a Bose-Einstein condensate causing a physical scalar volume to become vector waves? Is absolute zero impossible because the vector field is responsible for movement?

Is the vector field why waves are waves? Is it all possible paths that cause interference patterns? Do Scalar Volumes limit the number of possible paths? Does measurement cause Vector Waves to be Scalar Volumes?

[chiralSPO]

It's not just a measurement problem. It appears that there is actual indeterminacy, not just uncertainty.

Technically, it applies to macroscopic objects as well, but having 10^–29 meter "error bars" on the "location" of a 1 mm gnat isn't really meaningful.

I would also generally urge caution in this line of questioning. Indeterminacy is a necessary outcome of the equations we use to model quantum systems. These equations are great for making predictions that are verifiable, and various observations also support the notion of indeterminacy. But these are just models, and there could be other models that are even better descriptions of what is "actually happening." These better models would also have to include some mechanism for explaining the verified aspects of QM.

There are even technologies that *require* indeterminacy to work. For example ultrafast laser spectroscopy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrashort_pulse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrafast_laser_spectroscopy

[alancalverd]

Physics is about building useful mathematical models of reality. The catchphrase is "behaves like".

Bad science includes confusing models with reality. The catchphrase is "is".

[Virtual State (OP)]

Consider what momentum from vector would do to a scalar volume. I think there is something extremely fundamental here. Is position from Scalar? Is momentum from Vector?

Isn't Uncertainty all about Position and Momentum?

[chiralSPO]

Isn't Uncertainty all about Position and Momentum?

no. also time and energy. any operators that don't commute will result in indeterminacy

[Virtual State (OP)]

I think we are going to find all Uncertainty is related to Scalar vs Vector.
Consider what their properties are. Energy is Scalar.

[Virtual State (OP)]

Vector quantum waves always decohere/localize from something that is already scalar. Quantum information isn't lost to the environment, it is used by its scalar volume to become physical matter. Coherent lasers can avoid causing decoherence (scalar volumes) because it is vector/virtual. This is why they are used in a Bose-Einstein condensate.

[Virtual State (OP)]

Vector/Virtual Light Waves can only be as physical as the energy it becomes as scalar. If it doesn't have mass, does that mean a scalar volume doesn't form?

[Colin2B]

Vector/Virtual Light Waves can only be as physical as the energy it becomes as scalar. If it doesn't have mass, does that mean a scalar volume doesn't form?

This doesn’t make sense.

Consider what momentum from vector would do to a scalar volume. I think there is something extremely fundamental here. Is position from Scalar? Is momentum from Vector?

Isn't Uncertainty all about Position and Momentum?

In QM position is a vector

[Virtual State (OP)]

Particles in superposition are not physical. If they were their weight would multiply from being in all possible paths. Light can only be as physical as scalar can describe it with energy. Mass must be involved in the physical structure/volume of particles.

A vector and a vector quantity are two different things. A vector field is filled with vectors. A wave is defined by the number of vectors it used in the field. A non-local wave uses a lot more from all possible paths. The position might be considered vector, but the measured particle is a scalar volume.

[puppypower]

Are large objects subject to the Measurement Problem? If so, is it the uncertainty of the individual atoms and not the whole object? If it is the whole object, is it because it using Vector for Momentum?

Do scalar volumes use the vector field for direction (velocity, acceleration, momentum, path)? Is physical matter considered scalar volumes? Could uncertainty be from scalar volumes using vector?

Is the energy associated with light from vector momentum to scalar energy?

Is a Bose-Einstein condensate causing a physical scalar volume to become vector waves? Is absolute zero impossible because the vector field is responsible for movement?

Is the vector field why waves are waves? Is it all possible paths that cause interference patterns? Do Scalar Volumes limit the number of possible paths? Does measurement cause Vector Waves to be Scalar Volumes?

One thing th at can cause uncertainty is when there is more than one reference in the experiment, but we assume one relative reference is sufficient. Sometimes observational reference and object reference are not the same, even if they are called relative. This will cause differences in perceived energy balances, thereby creating uncertainty in measurements.

Let me give an example, say we have a man at a train station. The man is sitting waiting for his  moving train to arrive. The man, to pass time, plays a mind game and assumes relative reference is valid. He assumes he is moving and the arriving train is stationary.

This may appear valid in terms of the eyes and the hearing of doppler shifts, but it will cause an energy balance problem. A real moving train contains much more energy than the pretend moving of the man. The man's observational reference choice, although relative, creates the problem that the train's huge energy, is not included in his relative assumption, since he thinks it is stationary to him.This will lead to train uncertainty and/or require speculative theory to compensate. The extra energy will show up in some unexpected way.

In terms of atoms, the nucleus is essentially a stationary reference similar to the lab. The mass and matter of the nucleus is positioned by gravity, into structures, to mimic the lab position. The electron is a moving reference around the stationary nuclei. However, at the size of the atom, the atom appear stationary. But at the level of the election, there is motion. We do not get nucleus or atom uncertainty, but only election uncertainty.

One could say that the nucleus and election move relative to each other, but the election is always the moving reference since it is small, not as gravity controlled, and it occupies a larger volume of space. It also moves a fraction of the speed of light and therefore has a different kinetic energy, momentum and a different flow of time. The different flow of time alters its assumed position per unit of our time. Time also impact the system energy balance and perceived momentum; This can cause uncertainty if we use relative assumptions.

[Virtual State (OP)]

More than one reference usually means a property of vector is going to be used.

I don't understand the thought experiment if it isn't physically happening.

The weird thing about electrons is that they are never point particles while in electron shells. They are forced to be a wave because they have no start or end. Vector is for waves, so of course it has uncertainty.

[Virtual State (OP)]

Can we use imaginary numbers to describe Vector Quantities? Would that mean Vector Properties are always imaginary? What would that say about all possible paths of interference?

[Virtual State (OP)]

Could the complex plane be used to describe Vector? Is a scalar volume using real numbers?

[chiralSPO]

Could the complex plane be used to describe Vector?

yes, but only a 2-dimensional vector

Is a scalar volume using real numbers?

yes