Quatum jumps might not be random.

An interesting vid from PBS Space Time
What Happens during a quantum Jump

Interesting...The video starts off discussing the 2019 paper [that I believe originally was proposed in Minev's 2018 dissertation at Yale?], and then shifts to the more updated work on this ->

New Views of Quantum Jumps Challenge Core Tenets of Physics

Eleni Petrakou

The new study, published in Physical Review Research, models the step-by-step, cradle-to-grave evolution of quantum jumps—from the initial lower-energy state of the system, known as the ground state, then a second one where it has higher energy, called the excited state, and finally the transition back to the ground state. This modeling shows that the predictable, “catchable” quantum jumps must have a noncatchable counterpart, says author Kyrylo Snizhko....

The system transitions by passing through a mixture of the excited state and ground state, a quantum phenomenon known as superposition. But sometimes, when the connection exceeds a certain threshold, this superposition will shift toward a specific value of the mixture and tend to stay at that state until it moves to the ground unannounced. In that special case, “this probabilistic quantum jump cannot be predicted and reversed midflight,” explains Parveen

...In other words, even jumps for which timing was initially predictable would be followed by inherently unpredictable ones. But there is yet more nuance when examining the originally catchable jumps. Snizhko says that even these possess an unpredictable element. A catchable quantum jump will always proceed on a “trajectory” through the superposition of the excited and ground states, but there can be no guarantee that the jump will ever finish. “At each point in the trajectory, there is a probability that the jump continues and a probability that it is projected back to the ground state,” Snizhko says. “So the jump may start happening and then abruptly get canceled. The trajectory is totally deterministic—but whether the system will complete the trajectory or not is unpredictable.”

This behavior appeared in the Yale experiment’s results. The scientists behind that work called such catchable jumps “islands of predictability in a sea of uncertainty.”..

Of course the first experiment was on a virtual/simulated particle made with circuits, and the latter an argument based more on theory.

At the end of the above Sci Am article they talk about future research on actual particles.

I do like the phrase “islands of predictability in a sea of uncertainty" as it recalls something Cantor said regarding the relationship between the rationals and the irrationals ->

"The rationals are spotted in the line like stars in a black sky while the dense blackness is the firmament of the irrationals"

I do like the phrase “islands of predictability in a sea of uncertainty" as it recalls something Cantor said regarding the relationship between the rationals and the irrationals ->

"The rationals are spotted in the line like stars in a black sky while the dense blackness is the firmament of the irrationals"

It also resembles how I've described what I remember of how multiverses supposedly worked from my past life memories, "islands of stability in a sea of chaos" so that quote really jumped out at me. I guess I can add it to the pile of evidence, at least tentatively since its not fully demonstrated yet.

This *might* be related, as Kauffman suggests a Poised Realm between the "chaos" of the quantum and the predictable classical ->

The Non-Algorithmic Trans-Turing System


S. Kauffman

My purpose in the present blog is to try to persuade you that we can have information processing systems, “Beyond Turing,” that are not at all algorithmic. We can have information processing systems that partake of the weird “simultaneously both dead and alive” superposition states before they slowly decohere, hence Trans-Turing Systems are not definite.

...Such liposomes are open quantum systems, subject to decohrence and recoherence, perhaps as chlorophyll may be made more recoherent by absorbing light from chromophores in the antenna protein in the center of its absorption bands.  Again this is testable, for example, by observing a narrowing of absorption bands upon such light stimulation.

Vattay has found in his simulations that higher amplitude modes are more likely to decohere. This is reminiscent of Fermi’s Golden Rule which states that quantum systems are more likely to drop from a high energy state to the lowest energy state rather than to intermediate energy states...

...It is clear that this behavior is new.  It is not closed system quantum behavior describable by the Schrodinger equation. It is partially behavior in the Poised Realm with both weird superposition states and pure states, and partially classical FAPP or X axis classical behavior, and the system is also receiving driving quantum and classical inputs as a liposome with light of different wavelengths impinging upon its chromphores.  But its behavior is not merely classical.  And the behavior in the poised realm is not describable by the Schrodinger equation since decoherence is dissipative. Nor is it “quantum random”...

This *might* be related, as Kauffman suggests a Poised Realm between the "chaos" of the quantum and the predictable classical ->

The Non-Algorithmic Trans-Turing System


S. Kauffman

Some potential clarity in this paper by the physicist Gabor Vattay

We give a new explanation for why some biological systems can stay quantum coherent for a long time at room temperature, one of the fundamental puzzles of quantum biology. We show that systems with the right level of complexity between chaos and regularity can increase their coherence time by orders of magnitude. Systems near Critical Quantum Chaos or Metal-Insulator Transition (MIT) can have long coherence times and coherent transport at the same time. The new theory tested in a realistic light harvesting system model can reproduce the scaling of critical fluctuations reported in recent experiments. Scaling of return probability in the FMO light harvesting complex shows the signs of universal return probability decay observed at critical MIT. The results may open up new possibilities to design low loss energy and information transport systems in this Poised Realm hovering reversibly between quantum coherence and classicality.

It also resembles how I've described what I remember of how multiverses supposedly worked from my past life memories, "islands of stability in a sea of chaos" so that quote really jumped out at me. I guess I can add it to the pile of evidence, at least tentatively since its not fully demonstrated yet.

Might be of interest ->

Physicists Study How Universes Might Bubble Up and Collide

Charlie Wood

...In the early 1980s, as physicists investigated how space might have started — and stopped — inflating, an unsettling picture emerged. The researchers realized that while space may have stopped inflating here (in our bubble universe) and there (in other bubbles), quantum effects should continue to inflate most of space, an idea known as eternal inflation.

The difference between bubble universes and their surroundings comes down to the energy of space itself. When space is as empty as possible and can’t possibly lose more energy, it exists in what physicists call a “true” vacuum state. Think of a ball lying on the floor — it can’t fall any further. But systems can also have “false” vacuum states. Imagine a ball in a bowl on a table. The ball can roll around a bit while more or less staying put. But a large enough jolt will land it on the floor — in the true vacuum.

In the cosmological context, space can get similarly stuck in a false vacuum state. A speck of false vacuum will occasionally relax into true vacuum (likely through a random quantum event), and this true vacuum will balloon outward as a swelling bubble, feasting on the false vacuum’s excess energy, in a process called false vacuum decay. It’s this process that may have started our cosmos with a bang. “A vacuum bubble could have been the first event in the history of our universe,” said Hiranya Peiris, a cosmologist at University College London.