
A theory on why quantum indeterminacy or randomness exists - mangeletti
I just read https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.quantamagazine.org&#x2F;20150910-einstein-insanity&#x2F;. I&#x27;ve read many similar articles over the years, and I&#x27;ve spent a lot of time thinking about the - classically speaking, controversial - &quot;random&quot; aspects of quantum physics.<p>I would like to propose that the reason for quantum randomness has to do with the change in kinetic (or other) energy of all matter on earth. As the universe expands, the distance of any given object to the center of the universe&#x27;s mass will have changed, and so will the velocity, as well as the direction of motion. These slight changes, among many other unnoticeable changes could surely account for the necessary &quot;hidden information&quot; that make for &quot;quantum randomness&quot;. When I think of people slamming particles together at near the speed of light, the first question that comes to mind is, &quot;How could we possibly predict or measure the velocity accurately enough to be sure we&#x27;re doing exactly the same thing every time?&quot;. The next is, &quot;What about the changes in the minute effects (gravitational, EMR, etc.)  of distant objects in our solar system, galaxy, and the universe?&quot;.<p>Does anyone remember when CERN announced they observed faster than light neutrinos, and then that they didn&#x27;t. There are some things we will never understand, and passing them up for a quicker route to closure will not change anything. Lest we lose interest and hope in intuition as well as armchair philosophy, we shouldn&#x27;t become obsessed with empiricism.
======
dogma1138
The universe doesn't have a center of mass, or a center at all, if it had the
effects due to "expansion" as far as gravity goes would be very predictable to
the point of Newtonian equations being good enough to calculate those effects.
Other classical changes e.g. universe expands and gets colder as just as
predictable.

Also randomness is the least controversial aspect of QM, heck you can explain
randomness without QM simply by the inability to measure things without
affecting them in some way, e.g. to know where an atom is for example you need
to shine light at it which changes it's energy and also potentially moves it
as it both transfer inertia to the atom as well as excite one (or more) of it
electrons (you need to get that photon back somehow) which shakes it up as
well.

>Does anyone remember when CERN announced they observed faster than light
neutrinos, and then that they didn't. There are some things we will never
understand...

We can understand flimsy fiber cables that cause a sync issue in atomic clocks
pretty well :)

