Me and my shadow: quantum mechanics calls into question the concept of personality

Martin Guerre and stolen identity

Did you know Martin Guerra (Martin Guerre)? A French peasant who once got into a strange and unpleasant situation. Martin lived in a small village. When the boy was 24 years old, his own parents accused him of stealing. Herr was forced to leave his home, leaving his wife and son. Eight years later, the man returned to his native village, reunited with his family. Three years later, the family already had three children.

It seems that everything went on as usual. But in the village there was a foreign soldier, who stated that fought with Martin Gurr in the Spanish army and that he had lost a leg in battle. Martin's family began to doubt whether their relatives back home three years ago. After a long trial, it was found that the person Guerra "kidnapped" adventurer Arnaud du Thiel (Arnault du Tilh). This Martin really suffered the amputation of his legs and was appointed to the sinecure at a monastery in Spain. However, the trial of the "thief person" was so well-known that this Herr returned to his native village. The fate of the adventurer Arnaud du Thiel was solved a short sentence to death. And the wife of Martin accused of aiding the deceiver does not believe that a woman could not find her beloved husband.

This story excited the minds of writers and directors. In her explanation was filmed, staged a musical and even filmed the show. Moreover, one of the series "The Simpsons" is dedicated to the occasion. Such popularity is understandable: such incident excites us, because cuts to the quick - our notions of identity and personality.

How can we be sure that what is in fact a man, even if it is the mother? That generally means identity in a world where nothing is permanent?

The first philosophers have tried to answer this question. They assumed that we are different from each other soul, and our body - this is only a puppet. Sounds good, but science has rejected this solution to the problem and offered to look for the root of the identity of the physical body. Scientists have dreamed a dream to find something on a microscopic level that would distinguish one person from another.

Well, that science - exact thing. Therefore, when we say "something on a microscopic level," we of course mean the smallest building blocks of our body - molecules and atoms.

However, this track is more slippery than it might seem at first glance. Imagine Martin Guerre, for example. Mentally approaching it. Face, skin, pores... go further. As close as possible, if we have in service is the most powerful technique. What do we find? Electron.

Elementary particle in a box

Herr was made of molecules, molecule - of atoms, the atoms consist of elementary particles. The latter made "from nothing", they are the basic building blocks of the material world.

Electron - a point that literally takes up no space at all. Each electron is determined exclusively by weight spin (angular momentum) and charge. That's all you need to know to describe the "personality" of the electron.

What does it mean? For example, the fact that each electron is exactly the same as any other, without the slightest difference. They are absolutely identical. Unlike Martin Guerra and its counterpart, the electrons are similar so that they are completely interchangeable.

This fact has a rather amusing consequences. Imagine that we have an elementary particle A, which differs from the elementary particle B. In addition, we bummed two boxes - the first and second.

Yet we know that each particle must be in any of the boxes at any one time. So as we remember that the particles A and B are different from each other, it turns out that there are only four scenarios:

• A lies in the box 1, B is in the box 2;
• A and B are together in box 1;
• A and B are together in a box 2;
• A lies in the box 2, B 1 lies in the box.

It turns out that the probability of finding two particles at once in one box is equal to 1: 4. Ok, with that out.

But what if the particles A and B do not differ? What is the probability of finding two particles in one box in this case? Surprisingly, our thinking correctly determines if two particles are identical, the scenarios are only three. After all, there is no difference between the case where A is in the box 1, B 2 is in the box, and the case where B is in the box 1, A 2 is in the box. So, the probability is 1: 3.

Experimental study confirms that microcosm obeys a probability of 1: 3. That is, if you replace the electronic And on any other, the universe would not have noticed the difference. And you too.

sly electrons

Frank Wilczek (Frank Wilczek), a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Nobel Prize winner, has come to the same conclusion, as we have just that. This result is not just a scientist finds interesting. Wilczek said the fact that two electrons are completely indistinguishable, - this is the most profound and important conclusion of quantum field theory.

Control shot - the phenomenon of interference that is "betraying" the electron, and shows us his secret life. You see, if you sit and stare at the electron, it behaves as a particle. Once you turn away, and it exhibits the properties of waves. When two such waves overlap, they strengthen or weaken each other. Only necessary to consider that we are not referring to the physical and the mathematical concept of a wave. They carry no energy, and the probability - statistics affect the results of the experiment. In our case - to withdraw from the experience of two boxes in which we received a probability of 1: 3.

Interestingly, the phenomenon of interference only occurs when the particles are indeed identical. Experiments have shown that electrons are exactly the same: the interference occurs, which means that the particles are indistinguishable.

What is it? Wilczek says that the identity of the electron - this is what makes our world possible. Without it, there would be no chemistry. The matter would have been impossible to reproduce.

If electrons exist between at least some difference, everything would at once become a chaos. Their precise and unambiguous nature is the only basis for this full of uncertainties and mistakes world existed.

Good. Suppose an electron can not be distinguished from another. But we can put one in the first box, the other - in the second and say: "Here is the electron is here, and that - over there?"

"No, we can not" - says Professor Wilczek.

Once you lay the electrons at the boxes and turn away, they will cease to be a particle and will exhibit wave properties. This means that they will be of extended indefinitely. As strange as it may sound, there is the probability of finding the electron anywhere. Not in the sense that it is immediately at all points, and that you have a small chance to find it anywhere, if you suddenly decide to turn back and start looking for him.

It is clear that it is quite difficult to imagine. But there is an even more interesting question.

It electrons are tricky or space in which they are located? And then what happens to all that is around us, when we turn our backs?

The most difficult section

It turns out, finding two electrons can still be. The only problem is that you can not say that's the first wave, the second wave of the electron's, and we are all in three-dimensional space. It does not work in quantum mechanics.

You have to say that there is a separate wave in three-dimensional space for the first electron is in the second wave of three-dimensional space for the second. The result - crepe! - six-dimensional wave, which links the two electrons together. It sounds awful, but we understand that these two electrons do not hang out no one knows where. Their positions are clearly defined, but rather are related to this six-dimensional wave.

In general, if we had thought that there is a space and the things in it, then in view of the quantum theory will have to slightly change his view. The space here - it's just a way to describe the mutual relationship between objects, such as electrons. Therefore, the structure of the world we can not describe how properties all together particles of which it consists. All a bit more complicated: we have to study the relation between elementary particles.

As can be seen, due to the fact that the electrons (and other elementary particles) are absolutely identical to one another, the concept of identity itself disintegrates into dust. It turns out to divide the world into its component - is wrong.

Wilczek says that all electrons are identical. They are a manifestation of a field that permeates all space and time. Physicist John Archibald Wheeler (John Archibald Wheeler) thinks otherwise. He believes that was originally one electron, and the rest - it's just his trail, penetrating time and space. "What nonsense! - you can cry in this place. - Scientists have also detected by the electronics! "

But there is one thing.

What if it's all an illusion? Electron exists everywhere and nowhere. Material form it does not have. What to do? What then is the person who is made up of elementary particles?

No hope drops

We want to believe that every thing - is more than the sum of its constituent particles. What if we removed the charge of the electron, its mass and spin and got something in the residue, its identity, its "personality." We want to believe that there is something that makes the e-tron.

Even if statistics or experiment can not reveal the nature of the particles, we want to believe in it. After all, if there is something that makes each person unique.

Suppose there would be no difference between Martin Gurr and his double, but one of them would quietly smiled, knowing that he is real.

I'd like to believe it. But quantum mechanics is absolutely heartless and do not allow us to think about any nonsense.

Do not be fooled: if the electron has its own individual essence, the world would have turned into chaos.

Okay. Once the electrons and other elementary particles do not really exist, why do we exist?

Theory One: we snowflakes

One idea is that elementary particles have very much. They constitute a complex system in all of us. It seems that we are all different - a consequence of how it builds up our body of these elementary particles.

The theory of strange, but beautiful. None of the elementary particles do not have their individuality. But together they form a unique structure - human. If you want, we are like snowflakes. It is clear that all the water, but each pattern is unique.

Your essence - this is how you organized in the particles, and not that of which you are a member of it. The cells in our body are constantly changing, which means that the only thing that matters - it's the structure.

Theory two: we model

There is another answer to the question. American philosopher Daniel Dennett (Daniel Dennett) proposed to replace the term "thing" by "real model". According to Dennett and his followers, something real, if his theoretical description can be duplicated more briefly - in a nutshell a simple description. To explain how this works, take for example, cat.

So, we have a cat. Technically, we can re-create it on paper (or virtual), describing the position of each particle from which it is composed, and thus make a cat pattern. On the other hand, we can do otherwise: just say "cat." In the first case, we need huge computing power, not only to create an image of a cat, but also, for example, make it move, if we are talking about a computer model. In the second, we just need to breathe deeply and say, "Cat walked across the room." Cat - a real model.

Let us take another example. Imagine a composition that consists of a lobe of the left ear, the largest elephant in Namibia, and the music of Miles Davis (Miles Davis). To create this object computational methods require a lot of time. But as much you take, and a verbal description of the fantastic monster. Cut does not work, say two words, too, because such a composition is not real, and therefore does not exist. This is not a real model.

It turns out we only momentary structure, which arises under the eye of the beholder. Physicists add fuel to the fire and say that maybe in the final turns out that the world is generally made out of nothing. While that remains for us to point to each other and the world around him, describing all the words and giving names. The more complex the model, the more we have to compress its description, making it real. Take, for example, the human brain - one of the most complex systems in the universe. Try to describe it in a nutshell.

Try to describe it in one word. What do you get?

"I".