8

What makes us formulate quantum mechanics based on probability theory?

Isn't the real quantum world based on unknown laws to us?

Is it possible that results of an experiment will be measurable in another way but not expected value?

  • Electron tunelling has a probability and this leads to quantum physics because tunneling has an option like passing through a barrier that is impossible for classical mechanics. – huseyin tugrul buyukisik Jul 01 '13 at 16:27
  • If you measure something, you have changed it. – huseyin tugrul buyukisik Jul 01 '13 at 16:29
  • 1
    Because it works, all measurments agree with QM as it is. – Dilaton Jul 01 '13 at 16:52
  • The "real quantum world" is the world you (and everyone of us) leave in. QM is just a physical theory which successfully describes this world so far. And one of the postulates in QM is Born rule. Everyone is free to build his own theory based on different postulates. Give it a try and make an attempt to avoid probabilities and find the "hidden variables". I'm 100% that if one succeed on that way, the Nobel prize is guaranteed. – Wildcat Jul 01 '13 at 16:53
  • 4
    Some might argue that quantum mechanics is more fundamental than probability theory so you have your question the wrong way around. Eg. http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0953 – Dan Piponi Jul 01 '13 at 16:59
  • Science must give results which are predictible, so the use of probabilities is mandatory, otherwise it is religion. 2) Fundamental Quantum laws are known, and there is a incredible number of experiments compatible with these laws.
  • – Trimok Jul 01 '13 at 18:16
  • This has been asked many times before in one form or another. See for instance http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/17034 and http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/61593. –  Jul 01 '13 at 19:15
  • @ChrisWhite The duplicate seems backward. That one sounds like it's proposing that QM might really be a product of statistics, and this is asking why QM is formulated as a product of statistics. These don't sound like the same thing, but you can consider me confused. – Alan Rominger Jul 03 '13 at 15:24