Posted on 10/15/2024 2:40:36 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
A research team from the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), led by Prof. Jianwei Pan, Qiang Zhang, and Kai Chen, in collaboration with CHEN Jingling from Nankai University, has achieved the loophole-free test of Hardy's paradox for the first time. The team successfully demonstrated Hardy's nonlocality, closing both the detection efficiency loophole and the locality loophole...
Hardy's paradox, introduced by Lucien Hardy in the 1990s, offers a simplified test of local realism—the classical idea that physical properties exist independently of observation and that no signals exceed the speed of light. This paradox exposes the conflict between quantum mechanics and local realism by demonstrating that, under certain conditions where three "Hardy events" have a zero probability, quantum mechanics predicts a non-zero probability for a fourth event, which contradicts local realism.
Experimentally confirming Hardy's paradox is challenging due to the low probability of the fourth event, requiring high fidelity and efficiency in entanglement sources to distinguish it from noise. Prior experiments faced two main challenges: the locality loophole, where measurement choices could affect outcomes, and the detection efficiency loophole, due to optical losses.
In addressing the locality loophole, the researchers meticulously crafted a space-time experimental setup that ensured the measurement choices were spacelike separated from both the entangled state preparations and the photon detections. This configuration precludes any possibility of the measurement settings being influenced by the outcomes, thereby eliminating the locality loophole.
(Excerpt) Read more at scitechdaily.com ...
Bring out the Hellman's and bring out the Best!
Hellman's mayo is Best mayo west of the Rockies. Same stuff.
It is worse than that. If Hardy’s paradox is true we can’t know anything about the nature of anything because we can’t separate causes from effects.
It is just a way restating the old “There are no absolutes” moral argument. Hardy’s paradox is apparently undercut by its own axioms.
If we cannot divide causes from effects then we can’t know, at an ultimate level, anything about anything. And that includes the results of the experiment the researchers conducted. They cannot know their observations are true.
Human observation means what you might think. A human looking at or observing the thing being measured. Heisenberg’s principle says that until someone does a measurement, the physical state of a particle is indeterminate. In other words, electrons and protons don’t circle the nucleus of an atom like a little solar system. That is a Newtonian way of thinking. Rather, their position and velocity are merely probabilistic until measured.
Interesting point. The snake swallows its own tail.
This is deep...
It basically means the universe, as perceived, only exists and follows rules WHEN it is being observed.
Two particles, on opposite sides of the universe, can interact with each other INSTANTANEOUSLY. Forget the speed of light. This is the speed of thought.
One could say this infers that the universe exists AS consciousness.
Remember in the Matrix when Neo could control reality with his mind? This suggests that we live in such a reality.
It isn’t that we observe things that exist...more correct is things exist BECAUSE we observe them.
My head hurts.
Hardee’s Paradox.
Which way to go?
Frisco Breakfast sandwich or the super star combo?
Oh the huge manatee.
Yes, I’m (sufficiently for this) familiar with Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. It’s the “someone does a measurement” part I find a bit vague. What sort of observer, what sort of observation, qualifies? And what does not?
Again, just...wondering.
As I understand it, an observation is any action that obtains information about the particle’s location or speed.
Yup. I’d often wondered why. As a kid I’d see that on the Hellman’s label. So, first time I traveled to Cali, I went to a store to get a big map (remember those? :^) of LA and spotted a grocery section — all of the products were travel size or rather bodega size. I nabbed a Best Foods mayo. :^)
Sidebar, this store was not small, but the same ratio as a wafer. Half of one aisle on one side was nothing but hair care products. Half of one side of another aisle was entirely made up of bottled water (a number of brands and sizes). “Welcome to LA” I said to myself. :^)
Other experiments prove something that happens in the future can affect something that happened in the past.
= = =
I might suggest that things happening in the past will affect things happening in the future.
On the other hand, a future shooting of a gun, say, will make some past dead shooting victim rise from the dead when the future gun misfires.
For more recent applications, look at the voting returns for Trump vs. Biden overnight.
The only thing that I prefer local and Chinese is the Chinese takeout.
CC
So it’s like ‘believing what can be unburdened by what has been’?
Yeah, the company that makes Excedrin love this kind of thing. :^)
BTW, high five to all, I’d never have suspected this many replies in such a short time frame on this topic! Great job! Thanks all!
The 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics basically confirmed this already, but this provides more specific experimental data that may help answer many questions in various subfields within physics. This discovery fits with a theory by Donald Hoffman, who thinks our minds don’t show us the real world, but a simplified version. The Nobel Prize winners and those this article reports on did actual experiments, while Hoffman’s ideas come from math and game theory, not lab work. These discoveries, along with the development of artificial intelligence that can think like humans, might help us understand one of science’s biggest mysteries: how consciousness itself works. Turns out that the laws of physics are really just a function of collective consciousness, and we are living in what could practically be considered a simulation. And now we’ve got more proof.
So this must be a NIH test https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040962/ to see if their argument regarding Conspiracy spillovers and geoengineering will be accepted by those who lost family and friends or were burnt or flooded out of their homes will accept transitioned science explanations?
I’d never have suspected this many replies in such a short time frame on this topic!
= = =
Don’t our replies affect your original post?????
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2022/summary/
Loophole-free Bell inequality violation with superconducting circuits (2023)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05885-0
It’s called SunkenCiv’s Paradox.
Face it, we live in a computer simulation. I’m not kidding. This is not the real universe, this is the hypothetical one to see if you are ready for the real one. Think about it, nothing in the Bible contradicts that but rather confirms it. Quantum physics confirms it, or at least some heavy hitters in the QP field believe it so. If we give our life to God, we get to see Heaven or the real universe. Too many things point to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.