diogenes0

2009-Nov-27, 10:57 AM

I'm trying to understand roughly what quantum decoherence is about. I tried to explain it to myself in the following way, so if anyone can tell me if this makes any sense I'd appreciate it!

As you get more and more particles' wave functions interacting with one another, you begin to greatly limit the plausible values for their various variables.

In other words, a single particle's superpositions might contain a varied range of possible values for its variables (many with significant probabilities) -- so no decoherence. But, since even small classical objects are made up of so many billions upon billions of particles (and their interacting wave functions), the range of possible values for those particles' respective variables become restricted to that which will result in the classical object. The restriction to certain values would still be probabilistic, but with the probabilities for the classical outcome increasingly approaching 100% with every additional particle. And since there is a lot of radiation everywhere interacting with everything, decoherence is the norm. Was that anywhere near correct?

As you get more and more particles' wave functions interacting with one another, you begin to greatly limit the plausible values for their various variables.

In other words, a single particle's superpositions might contain a varied range of possible values for its variables (many with significant probabilities) -- so no decoherence. But, since even small classical objects are made up of so many billions upon billions of particles (and their interacting wave functions), the range of possible values for those particles' respective variables become restricted to that which will result in the classical object. The restriction to certain values would still be probabilistic, but with the probabilities for the classical outcome increasingly approaching 100% with every additional particle. And since there is a lot of radiation everywhere interacting with everything, decoherence is the norm. Was that anywhere near correct?