Scientists cast doubt on the uncertainty principle (2012)

rdmag.com

9 points·joeyespo··9 comments

Why does every article on that site say "Advertisement" at the top? Makes me skeptical of everything there.

I'm sure that that word refers to the banner ad underneath it, not the entire page.

OH. Adblock Plus to the rescue. They should really look at their site with that on because the whole thing looks like a scam site.

the actual publication is a little less cryptic: http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v109/i10/e100404

basically, the uncertainty principle still stands. what is being questioned is the application of the uncertainty principle to describe the relationship between measurement and the disturbance it creates, which has never been proven, but is commonly taught as an application.

Thanks! This makes some sense. It's basically saying that the uncertainty (if it still exists) is caused by something else than a disturbance from measurement?

It's not saying the uncertainty is from something else, but just the relationship of how much disturbance there is from a measurement is not fully understood and is not accurately described by the uncertainty principle.

Can any physicists comment on the article?

done. i'm not a physicist by trade, but i did my university studies in physics.

http://quanta.ws/ojs/index.php/quanta/article/view/14 Here is an explanation that weak measurements does not contradict the Heisenberg principle.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com