Close Menu
TechCentralTechCentral

    Subscribe to the newsletter

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn
    WhatsApp Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn YouTube
    TechCentralTechCentral
    • News

      Cell C may list on the JSE as Blue Label eyes big restructuring

      16 May 2025

      Nvidia shares roar back to life

      16 May 2025

      5 000 fake DStv chargers seized, destroyed in Durban port bust

      16 May 2025

      Now Facebook wants to … scan your face

      16 May 2025

      Grok’s South Africa blunder raises alarms over chatbot oversight

      16 May 2025
    • World

      Microsoft to lay off 3% of workforce in organisation-wide cuts

      14 May 2025

      AI-voiced audiobooks are coming to Audible

      13 May 2025

      Apple turns to AI to tackle iPhone battery woes

      13 May 2025

      Vodafone CFO to step down

      7 May 2025

      Lights, camera, tariffs: Trump declares war on foreign flicks

      5 May 2025
    • In-depth

      South Africa unveils big state digital reform programme

      12 May 2025

      Is this the end of Google Search as we know it?

      12 May 2025

      Social media’s Big Tobacco moment is coming

      13 April 2025

      This is Europe’s shot to emerge from Silicon Valley’s shadow

      10 April 2025

      Microsoft turns 50

      4 April 2025
    • TCS

      Meet the CIO | Schalk Visser on Cell C’s big tech pivot

      13 May 2025

      TCS | Kiaan Pillay on fintech start-up Stitch and its R1-billion funding round

      7 May 2025

      TCS+ | Switchcom and Huawei eKit: networking made easy for SMEs

      6 May 2025

      TCS | How Covid sparked a corporate tug-of-war over Adapt IT

      30 April 2025

      TCS+ | Inside MTN’s big brand overhaul

      11 April 2025
    • Opinion

      Solar panic? The truth about SSEG, fines and municipal rules

      14 April 2025

      Data protection must be crypto industry’s top priority

      9 April 2025

      ICT distributors must embrace innovation or risk irrelevance

      9 April 2025

      South Africa unprepared for deepfake chaos

      3 April 2025

      Google: South African media plan threatens investment

      3 April 2025
    • Company Hubs
      • Africa Data Centres
      • AfriGIS
      • Altron Digital Business
      • Altron Document Solutions
      • Arctic Wolf
      • AvertITD
      • Braintree
      • CallMiner
      • CYBER1 Solutions
      • Digicloud Africa
      • Digimune
      • Domains.co.za
      • ESET
      • Euphoria Telecom
      • Incredible Business
      • iONLINE
      • Iris Network Systems
      • LSD Open
      • NEC XON
      • Network Platforms
      • Next DLP
      • Ovations
      • Paracon
      • Paratus
      • Q-KON
      • SkyWire
      • Solid8 Technologies
      • Tenable
      • Vertiv
      • Videri Digital
      • Wipro
      • Workday
    • Sections
      • AI and machine learning
      • Banking
      • Broadcasting and Media
      • Cloud services
      • Contact centres and CX
      • Cryptocurrencies
      • Education and skills
      • Electronics and hardware
      • Energy and sustainability
      • Enterprise software
      • Fintech
      • Information security
      • Internet and connectivity
      • Internet of Things
      • Investment
      • IT services
      • Lifestyle
      • Motoring
      • Public sector
      • Retail and e-commerce
      • Science
      • Social media
      • Talent and leadership
      • Telecoms
    • Events
    • Advertise
    TechCentralTechCentral
    Home » In-depth » Study suggests objective reality does not exist

    Study suggests objective reality does not exist

    By The Conversation17 November 2019
    Twitter LinkedIn Facebook WhatsApp Email Telegram Copy Link
    News Alerts
    WhatsApp

    Alternative facts are spreading like a virus across society. Now it seems they have even infected science — at least the quantum realm. This may seem counterintuitive. The scientific method is after all founded on the reliable notions of observation, measurement and repeatability. A fact, as established by a measurement, should be objective, such that all observers can agree with it.

    But in a paper recently published in Science Advances, we show that, in the micro-world of atoms and particles that is governed by the strange rules of quantum mechanics, two different observers are entitled to their own facts. In other words, according to our best theory of the building blocks of nature itself, facts can actually be subjective.

    Observers are powerful players in the quantum world. According to the theory, particles can be in several places or states at once — this is called a superposition. But oddly, this is only the case when they aren’t observed. The second you observe a quantum system, it picks a specific location or state — breaking the superposition. The fact that nature behaves this way has been proven multiple times in the lab — for example, in the famous double slit experiment (see video below).

    In 1961, physicist Eugene Wigner proposed a provocative thought experiment. He questioned what would happen when applying quantum mechanics to an observer that is themselves being observed. Imagine that a friend of Wigner tosses a quantum coin — which is in a superposition of both heads and tails — inside a closed laboratory. Every time the friend tosses the coin, they observe a definite outcome. We can say that Wigner’s friend establishes a fact: the result of the coin toss is definitely head or tail.

    Wigner doesn’t have access to this fact from the outside, and according to quantum mechanics, must describe the friend and the coin to be in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment. That’s because they are “entangled” — spookily connected so that if you manipulate one you also manipulate the other. Wigner can now in principle verify this superposition using a so-called “interference experiment” — a type of quantum measurement that allows you to unravel the superposition of an entire system, confirming that two objects are entangled.

    When Wigner and the friend compare notes later on, the friend will insist they saw definite outcomes for each coin toss. Wigner, however, will disagree whenever he observed friend and coin in a superposition.

    This presents a conundrum. The reality perceived by the friend cannot be reconciled with the reality on the outside. Wigner originally didn’t consider this much of a paradox, he argued it would be absurd to describe a conscious observer as a quantum object. However, he later departed from this view, and according to formal textbooks on quantum mechanics, the description is perfectly valid.

    The experiment

    The scenario has long remained an interesting thought experiment. But does it reflect reality? Scientifically, there has been little progress on this until very recently, when Časlav Brukner at the University of Vienna showed that, under certain assumptions, Wigner’s idea can be used to formally prove that measurements in quantum mechanics are subjective to observers.

    Brukner proposed a way of testing this notion by translating the Wigner’s friend scenario into a framework first established by the physicist John Bell in 1964. Brukner considered two pairs of Wigners and friends, in two separate boxes, conducting measurements on a shared state — inside and outside their respective box. The results can be summed up to ultimately be used to evaluate a so called “Bell inequality”. If this inequality is violated, observers could have alternative facts.

    We have now for the first time performed this test experimentally at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh on a small-scale quantum computer made up of three pairs of entangled photons. The first photon pair represents the coins, and the other two are used to perform the coin toss — measuring the polarisation of the photons — inside their respective box. Outside the two boxes, two photons remain on each side that can also be measured.

    Despite using state-of-the-art quantum technology, it took weeks to collect sufficient data from just six photons to generate enough statistics. But eventually, we succeeded in showing that quantum mechanics might indeed be incompatible with the assumption of objective facts — we violated the inequality.

    The theory, however, is based on a few assumptions. These include that the measurement outcomes are not influenced by signals travelling above light speed and that observers are free to choose what measurements to make. That may or may not be the case.

    This experiment shows that, at least for local models of quantum mechanics, we need to rethink our notion of objectivity

    Another important question is whether single photons can be considered to be observers. In Brukner’s theory proposal, observers do not need to be conscious, they must merely be able to establish facts in the form of a measurement outcome. An inanimate detector would therefore be a valid observer. And textbook quantum mechanics gives us no reason to believe that a detector, which can be made as small as a few atoms, should not be described as a quantum object just like a photon. It may also be possible that standard quantum mechanics does not apply at large length scales, but testing that is a separate problem.

    This experiment therefore shows that, at least for local models of quantum mechanics, we need to rethink our notion of objectivity. The facts we experience in our macroscopic world appear to remain safe, but a major question arises over how existing interpretations of quantum mechanics can accommodate subjective facts.
    Some physicists see these new developments as bolstering interpretations that allow more than one outcome to occur for an observation, for example the existence of parallel universes in which each outcome happens. Others see it as compelling evidence for intrinsically observer-dependent theories such as Quantum Bayesianism, in which an agent’s actions and experiences are central concerns of the theory. But yet others take this as a strong pointer that perhaps quantum mechanics will break down above certain complexity scales.

    Clearly these are all deeply philosophical questions about the fundamental nature of reality. Whatever the answer, an interesting future awaits.The Conversation

    • Written by Alessandro Fedrizzi, professor of quantum physics, Heriot-Watt University, and Massimiliano Proietti, PhD candidate of quantum physics, Heriot-Watt University
    • This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence


    top
    Subscribe to TechCentral Subscribe to TechCentral
    Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email Copy Link
    Previous Article‘A disaster’: Labour plan to nationalise UK broadband slammed
    Next Article Orange starts work toward IPO of its Africa business

    Related Posts

    18GW in unplanned breakdowns cripple Eskom

    2 November 2021

    Nersa kicks the Karpowership can down the road

    13 September 2021

    If you think South African load shedding is bad, try Zimbabwe’s

    13 September 2021
    Company News

    Zoom Fibre’s mission: powering the economy with world-class internet

    16 May 2025

    Retailers: take back control of your tech stack with self-enablement

    15 May 2025

    Sigfox South Africa unveils next-gen asset intelligence for smarter logistics

    15 May 2025
    Opinion

    Solar panic? The truth about SSEG, fines and municipal rules

    14 April 2025

    Data protection must be crypto industry’s top priority

    9 April 2025

    ICT distributors must embrace innovation or risk irrelevance

    9 April 2025

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    © 2009 - 2025 NewsCentral Media

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.