Posted on 12/28/2005 1:42:38 PM PST by snarks_when_bored
Einstein said there would be days like this.
This fall scientists announced that they had put a half dozen beryllium atoms into a "cat state."
No, they were not sprawled along a sunny windowsill. To a physicist, a "cat state" is the condition of being two diametrically opposed conditions at once, like black and white, up and down, or dead and alive.
These atoms were each spinning clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time. Moreover, like miniature Rockettes they were all doing whatever it was they were doing together, in perfect synchrony. Should one of them realize, like the cartoon character who runs off a cliff and doesn't fall until he looks down, that it is in a metaphysically untenable situation and decide to spin only one way, the rest would instantly fall in line, whether they were across a test tube or across the galaxy.
The idea that measuring the properties of one particle could instantaneously change the properties of another one (or a whole bunch) far away is strange to say the least - almost as strange as the notion of particles spinning in two directions at once. The team that pulled off the beryllium feat, led by Dietrich Leibfried at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, in Boulder, Colo., hailed it as another step toward computers that would use quantum magic to perform calculations.
But ...
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Thanks for the ping!
Who is this "we" to whom you refer?
No information transfer channel appears to be involved.
The information channel doesn't exist as a wire or cable or energy transfer across the ether. It appears as though the particular (pun) atom of Be is supposed to spin in a particular way, along with ALL its brethren in this universe. If ANY atom of Be is forced to be different from the others, in any way, the others follow (instantaneously) suit to keep the family together, like they were all permanently connected. One atom in a device in a lab (or communications center) is changed or modulated in such a way as to convey a message. Digital 1's and 0's can be represented as, say, CW and CCW spin. Another atom of the same element, in another place, next door, down the street, across the continent, on the moon or another star system, is monitored for it's direction of spin and decifered. The message is sent and received. Instantaneous communications faster than the speed of light. It doesn't break the rules of Einstein's universe, because there is no travel involved, and hence no time. It's outside the realm of normal light physics, so the rules are different. This is thinking outside the box of Einstein's rules. He was correct, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. And I do mean nothing.............
See my post #83......
I'm My Own Grandpa
Lyrics: Dwight Latham, Moe Jaffe
Music: Dwight Latham, Moe Jaffe
Played by Jerry Garcia with David Grisman
Oh, many, many years ago
When I was twenty-three
I was married to a widow
Who was pretty as can be
This widow had a grown-up daughter
Who had hair of red
My father fell in love with her
And soon the two were wed
This made my dad my son-in-law
And changed my very life
For my daughter was my mother
'Cause she was my father's wife
To complicate the matter
Though it really brought me joy
I soon became the father
Of a bouncing baby boy
This little baby then became
A brother-in-law to Dad
And so became my uncle
Though it made me very sad
For if he was my uncle
Then that also made him brother
Of the widow's grown-up daughter
WHo of course is my step-mother
Chorus
I'm my own grandpa
I'm my own grandpa
It sounds funny I know
But it really is so
Oh, I'm my own grandpa
My father's wife then had a son
Who kept them on the run
And he became my grandchild
For he was my daughter's son
My wife is now my mother's mother
And it makes me blue
Because although she is my wife
She's my grandmother too
Now if my wife is my grandmother
Then I'm her grandchild
And every time I think of it
It nearly drives me wild
For now I have become
The strangest case you ever saw
As husband of my grandma
I am my own grandpa
[chorus]
.................
LOVED Weaver's line:
Computer: No alternaive sphere available
Weaver: We don't have another one
Crewman: Do you have any idea how annoying that is?
Weaver: Look, I have ONE g*ddamn job on this ship, it's a stupid job, but I'm going to do it, okay?
Ohh, them.
They are the observed.
I'm the observer.
So9
Ohh, them.
They are the observed.
I'm the observer.
And here's a quote from Lecture 5 (9/13/2005) of that course, a lecture entitled "Entanglement can facilitate information processing" (a PDF file):
One doesn't need to know much about Dirac notation to grasp the general point being made here, I think. Your claim that
Nature is consistent with quantum mechanics and not with local realism, confirming that for the wavefunction
ψ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩nothing can be known about the coefficients α, β until a measurement is made.Entangled pairs of qubits such as
|ψab⟩ = (1 ⁄ √2) (|0a1b⟩ + |1a0b⟩)can be used to facilitate sharing or transmission of information, but not to transmit information from A to B directly. I.e., there is no superluminal transfer of information happening in an entangled state. Why not? Because Alice has no control over the result of her measurement and consequently she cannot control what Bob measures either.
[t]he message is sent and received. Instantaneous communications faster than the speed of light.
is wrong if currently understood physics is right.
Best regards...
All it takes is one experiment (and several millions of dollars).............
I meant to reply to you yesterday...sorry. Those are great Clarke quotes, without question.
When I read this my nose is both bleeding and not bleeding at the same time.>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am currently both having sex with a beautiful.....oh, forget it.
Actually that's not true. The world doesn't care whether your equations are correct or not. It is what it is. However if your equations are not correct, sooner or later you'll find a situation where your predictions do not agree with the theory. Then you might be in line for a Nobel prize, if you can come up with a theory that does predict the observed results, while still predicting earlier results that did not conflict with the "old" theory.
No, you just don't know which it is, and since you don't know, it might as well be both alive and dead. Until you open the box and the probability wave collapses. The the cat will be alive or dead, but not both.
UnLikely story.. Obviously a story from a democrat.. who believe in such things..
"We contend that for a nation(democrats) to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." ~Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Sooooo, if a cat dies in a box and there's no one to see it, it's still alive?
No, you just don't know which it is, and since you don't know, it might as well be both alive and dead.
But the cat knows?
(laughing)
"So has anyone confirmed yet that the cat is both dead and alive? I wonder what it would be like."
Just ask Alan Colmes.
One atom in a device in a lab (or communications center) is changed or modulated in such a way as to convey a message. Digital 1's and 0's can be represented as, say, CW and CCW spin. Another atom of the same element, in another place, next door, down the street, across the continent, on the moon or another star system, is monitored for it's direction of spin and decifered. The message is sent and received. Instantaneous communications faster than the speed of light.
The passage that I quoted in my earlier post to you (#89) states why this won't work: "...Alice has no control over the result of her measurement and consequently she cannot control what Bob measures either." The outcome of the change or modulation of which you speak (by which I take it that you mean 'measurement') will have a range of possible values (corresponding to eigenvalues of the Hermitian operator representing the quantum observable being measured), but which specific value is found during any single measurement is a matter of chance and cannot be controlled by the experimenter (i.e., Alice). So no determinate message could be 'sent' to Bob by way of entanglement relations.
If you say so.........but it spins.......
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.