In: Physics
Let suppose you roll a die, and it falls into a hidden place,
for example under furniture.
Then although the experiment has already been made (the die already
has a number to show), that value can not be known, so the
experiment was not fully realized.
Then till you see the die's top side, the probability remain p =
1/6.
I see no difference between this and the wave function collapse, at
least as an analogy.
Can someone explain a deeper difference?
You're absolutely right: the probabilities predicted by quantum mechanics are conceptually fully analogous to probabilities predicted by classical statistical mechanics, or statistical mechanics with a somewhat undetermined initial state - just like your metaphor with dice indicates. In particular, the predicted probability is a "state of our knowledge" about the system and no object has to "collapse" in any physical way in order to explain the measurements.
There are two main differences between the classical and quantum probabilities which are related to one another:
In classical physics - i.e. in the case of dice assuming that it follows classical mechanics - one may imagine that the dice already has a particular value before we look. This assumption isn't useful to predict anything but we may assume that the "sharp reality" exists prior to and independently of any observations. In quantum mechanics, one is not allowed to assume this "realism". Assuming it inevitably leads to wrong predictions.
The quantum probabilities are calculated as where c
are complex numbers, the so-called probability amplitudes, which
may interfere with other contributions to these amplitudes. So the
probabilities of outcomes, whenever some histories may overlap, are
not given as the sum over probabilities but the squared absolute
value of the sum of the complex probability amplitudes: in quantum
mechanics, we first sum the complex numbers, and then we square the
result to get the total probability. On the other hand, there is no
interference in classical physics; in classical physics, we would
surely calculate the probabilities of individual histories, by any
tools, and then we would sum the probabilities.
Of course, there is a whole tower of differences related to the fact that the observable (quantities) in quantum mechanics are given by operators that don't commute with each other: this leads to new logical relationships between statements and their probabilities that would be impossible in classical physics.
A closely related question to yours:
Why quantum entanglement is considered to be active link between particles?
The reason why people often misunderstand the analogy between the odds for dice and the quantum wave function is that they imagine that the wave function is a classical wave that may be measured in a single repetition of the situation. In reality, the quantum wave function is not a classical wave and it cannot be measured in a single case of the situation, not even in principle: we may only measure the values of the quantities that the wave function describes, and the result is inevitably random and dictated by a probability distribution extracted from the wave function.