# Today Quantum mechanics is "non-mechanical" theory. **URL:** \ **Category:** Science and Technology\ **Created:** [June 19, 2014, 12:21pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655 "2014-06-19T12:21:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![socratus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@socratus](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/socratus)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 12:21pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/1 "2014-06-19T12:21:07Z")
Today Quantum mechanics is “non-mechanical” theory. Why? Because Classic Mechanics deals with objects that have real physical parameters : size, volume, geometrical forms and QM doesn’t have real particles. In QM we are missed geometrical form of quantum particle. Real quantum particle cannot be a “point”. Real quantum particle cannot be a “firm golf-ball” ( forbidden by SRT) Using models like “point-particle” or “firm golf-ball”, we cannot describe QM in mechanical terms. One can adopt QM “visually” only understanding the mechanical model of quantum particle (!) . . . … . and then giving forces to it . . . . . . . . see how this model works mechanically . . . . . . . and what is result of its mechanical behavior. Once again. QM is very practical theory and therefore it cannot be paradoxical. Its interpretation must be realistic. The best realistic way is to observe quantum particle as a simple mechanical object which somehow can produce quantum electrical (EM) effects. ==… Einstein wrote: “Some physicists, among whom I am myself can not believe that we should once and for all abandon the idea of direct images of physical reality in space and time, or that we should agree with the opinion that a phenomenon in nature like a game case.” /Einstein/ How is it possible to see / to image geometrical form of quantum particle “direct”? In my opinion there is only one way to see / to image geometrical form of quantum particle “direct”: we need to observe quantum particle in its own-native reference frame – zero vacuum T=0K. ==… ---
**Author:** ![cuthbertj](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/cuthbertj/32/18_2.png) [@cuthbertj](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/cuthbertj)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 3:19pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/2 "2014-06-19T15:19:55Z")
I’m curious. Why do you post these things in a forum that’s obviously not appropriate for the content? Why not post to a physics forum where professional physicists can offer feedback? ---
**Author:** ![socratus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@socratus](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/socratus)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 9:05pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/3 "2014-06-20T21:05:36Z")
" The mathematics of QM is straightforward, but making the connection between the mathematics and an intuitive picture of the physical world is very hard" / Claude N. Cohen-Tannoudji . Nobel Prize in Physics 1997 / ==… The probabilistic solution of QM is only a top of an iceberg, the biggest part of this iceberg – the quantum deterministic process is hidden under the Dirac’s “sea of vacuum”. ==… ---
**Author:** ![occam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/e9bcb4/32.png) [@occam](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/occam)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/4 "2014-06-21T21:13:14Z")
Sorry, Cuthbert. Apparently Socratus hasn’t the vaguest idea of the existence of other people as indicated by his complete lack of response to your question. :lol: Occam ---
**Author:** ![socratus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@socratus](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/socratus)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2014, 11:01am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/5 "2014-06-22T11:01:47Z")
> Sorry, Cuthbert. Apparently Socratus hasn't the vaguest idea of the existence of other people as indicated by his complete lack of response to your question. :lol: Occam Dear Moderator Occam Do you answer to every replica ? All the best socratus = ---
**Author:** ![cuthbertj](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/cuthbertj/32/18_2.png) [@cuthbertj](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/cuthbertj)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2014, 4:38pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/6 "2014-06-24T16:38:15Z")
Dear original poster whose username I’m reluctant to use since it references a great philosopher, Answer my question. ---
**Author:** ![occam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/e9bcb4/32.png) [@occam](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/occam)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2014, 7:41pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/today-quantum-mechanics-is-non-mechanical-theory/3655/7 "2014-06-24T19:41:58Z")
It’s possibly best if we all just put him on ignore. That way his ramblings don’t clutter our forum. :lol: Occam