I seriously had to read this three times.
Quantum Experiment Shows Effect Before Cause (http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/24/2031211/quantum-experiment-shows-effect-before-cause)Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday April 24, @04:32PM
from the
enjoy-the-headache dept.Quote from: 'steveb3210 writes'
"Physicists have demonstrated that making a decision about whether or not to entangle two photons can be made after you've already measured the states of the photons (http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/04/decision-to-entangle-effects-results-of-measurements-taken-beforehand.ars)."
Here's the article's description of the experiment:
'Two independent sources (labeled I and II) produce pairs of photons such that their polarization states are entangled.
One photon from I goes to Alice, while one photon from II is sent to Bob.
The second photon from each source goes to Victor.
Alice and Bob independently perform polarization measurements; no communication passes between them during the experiment—they set the orientation of their polarization filters without knowing what the other is doing.
At some time after Alice and Bob perform their measurements, Victor makes a choice (the "delayed choice" in the name). He either allows his two photons from I and II to travel on without doing anything, or he combines them so that their polarization states are entangled.
A final measurement determines the polarization state of those two photons.
... Ma et al. found to a high degree of confidence that when Victor selected entanglement, Alice and Bob found correlated photon polarizations. This didn't happen when Victor left the photons alone.'
The state of the photons turns out to be the state measured by the guy who did the measurements AFTER the fact, but without prior knowledge of what those states were?
My eyes are trying to invertthemsels into my skull.
Quote from: Guru Coyote on April 25, 2012, 05:33:45 AM
The state of the photons turns out to be the state measured by the guy who did the measurements AFTER the fact, but without prior knowledge of what those states were?
My eyes are trying to invertthemsels into my skull.
:lulz:
I'm not going to be able to fall asleep very easily now. Shit.
Trying to comprehend this is like trying to visualize a floor tiled with regular octagons.
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I have no idea, and I will probably never know. :lulz:
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:48:37 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I have no idea, and I will probably never know. :lulz:
This place is weird. I demand an explanation.
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 07:10:09 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:48:37 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I have no idea, and I will probably never know. :lulz:
This place is weird. I demand an explanation.
QUANTUM!
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 07:14:47 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 07:10:09 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:48:37 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I have no idea, and I will probably never know. :lulz:
This place is weird. I demand an explanation.
QUANTUM!
I gave up the science thing in favor of the music thing 18 years ago (I blame Crazy Uncle Bob for exposing me to Nirvana). I need QUANTUM dumbed down into Guitarist.
Also, it just humorously occurred to me that Crazy Uncle Bob is perhaps the most influential person in my life. since he sparked a major career goal shift.
I'm not sure how I feel about that. I call him Crazy Uncle Bob for a reason, since I only have one uncle named Bob (the other uncle Robert goes by Rob, and is my grandmother's brother).
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
Unless you adhere to Timeless Physics (http://lesswrong.com/lw/qp/timeless_physics/), yes.
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 07:41:51 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
Unless you adhere to Timeless Physics (http://lesswrong.com/lw/qp/timeless_physics/), yes.
Opened new tab, going to leave it up until later.
Don't want my head exploding before breakfast.
Time is an illusion. Breakfast time doubly so.
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I don't think time actually "is" linear, but it's the way Western science decided to describe it, which is fair and reasonable.
Quote from: Nigel on April 25, 2012, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I don't think time actually "is" linear, but it's the way Western science decided to describe it, which is fair and reasonable.
Not being 4th dimensional creatures I don;t see how we could describe it as anything else. ;)
I think they just scientifically disproved the existence of free will. :eek:
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 25, 2012, 08:34:53 PM
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
I think so. Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 04:10:52 PM
Quote from: Nigel on April 25, 2012, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I don't think time actually "is" linear, but it's the way Western science decided to describe it, which is fair and reasonable.
Not being 4th dimensional creatures I don;t see how we could describe it as anything else. ;)
There are a few non-Western cultures that describe it differently. There's one that describes it as a three-dimensional space in which multiple things are all happening at once, which make the other things go. It's hard for me to grasp because that's not a framework I'm familiar with. There's another which describes the future as being behind us and the past ahead of us. It's easy to get sucked into the trap of thinking that our way of thinking about things makes the most sense because it's the most obvious or most logical, or even the most possible, but that isn't necessarily the case.
12 IMIX in my case its far more like in my time, than My Space
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 08:41:01 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 25, 2012, 08:34:53 PM
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
I think so. Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.
I have read that Timeless Physics page several times over the last 2 years, and I still do not understand it. Maybe time to use Feynmen self-teaching to get through to my brain.
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 08:41:01 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 25, 2012, 08:34:53 PM
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
I think so. Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.
I still have to read Less Wrong. I've been meaning to get to it for some time.
Quote from: Nigel on April 26, 2012, 01:23:24 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 04:10:52 PM
Quote from: Nigel on April 25, 2012, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
I don't think time actually "is" linear, but it's the way Western science decided to describe it, which is fair and reasonable.
Not being 4th dimensional creatures I don;t see how we could describe it as anything else. ;)
There are a few non-Western cultures that describe it differently. There's one that describes it as a three-dimensional space in which multiple things are all happening at once, which make the other things go. It's hard for me to grasp because that's not a framework I'm familiar with. There's another which describes the future as being behind us and the past ahead of us. It's easy to get sucked into the trap of thinking that our way of thinking about things makes the most sense because it's the most obvious or most logical, or even the most possible, but that isn't necessarily the case.
It's a cognitive bias on my part, I admit. My mind breaks down when trying to think of the 4th dimension as much as your does when I say North of Sol. :wink:
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 26, 2012, 10:35:29 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 08:41:01 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 25, 2012, 08:34:53 PM
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
I think so. Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.
I have read that Timeless Physics page several times over the last 2 years, and I still do not understand it. Maybe time to use Feynmen self-teaching to get through to my brain.
I think I get it, on a conceptual level, but I want to go over the maths a bit more, because, statistics aside, I'm working with essentially high school level stuff, which is not ideal.
How did Feynman teach himself calculus, by the way? I'm aware that he did, but I've never seen anything on how he went about it.
Quote from: Telarus on April 25, 2012, 05:27:14 AM
I seriously had to read this three times.
Quantum Experiment Shows Effect Before Cause (http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/24/2031211/quantum-experiment-shows-effect-before-cause)
Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday April 24, @04:32PM
from the enjoy-the-headache dept.
Quote from: 'steveb3210 writes'
"Physicists have demonstrated that making a decision about whether or not to entangle two photons can be made after you've already measured the states of the photons (http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/04/decision-to-entangle-effects-results-of-measurements-taken-beforehand.ars)."
Here's the article's description of the experiment:
'Two independent sources (labeled I and II) produce pairs of photons such that their polarization states are entangled.
One photon from I goes to Alice, while one photon from II is sent to Bob.
The second photon from each source goes to Victor.
Alice and Bob independently perform polarization measurements; no communication passes between them during the experiment—they set the orientation of their polarization filters without knowing what the other is doing.
At some time after Alice and Bob perform their measurements, Victor makes a choice (the "delayed choice" in the name). He either allows his two photons from I and II to travel on without doing anything, or he combines them so that their polarization states are entangled.
A final measurement determines the polarization state of those two photons.
... Ma et al. found to a high degree of confidence that when Victor selected entanglement, Alice and Bob found correlated photon polarizations. This didn't happen when Victor left the photons alone.'
This is BULLSHIT. It's God, CHEATING.
The idea of teaching oneself calculus sounds quite difficult... math is one of those things that makes sense when someone demonstrates it, but trying to read the steps in books is terribly confusing for me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on April 27, 2012, 07:29:34 PM
Quote from: Telarus on April 25, 2012, 05:27:14 AM
I seriously had to read this three times.
Quantum Experiment Shows Effect Before Cause (http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/24/2031211/quantum-experiment-shows-effect-before-cause)
Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday April 24, @04:32PM
from the enjoy-the-headache dept.
Quote from: 'steveb3210 writes'
"Physicists have demonstrated that making a decision about whether or not to entangle two photons can be made after you've already measured the states of the photons (http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/04/decision-to-entangle-effects-results-of-measurements-taken-beforehand.ars)."
Here's the article's description of the experiment:
'Two independent sources (labeled I and II) produce pairs of photons such that their polarization states are entangled.
One photon from I goes to Alice, while one photon from II is sent to Bob.
The second photon from each source goes to Victor.
Alice and Bob independently perform polarization measurements; no communication passes between them during the experiment—they set the orientation of their polarization filters without knowing what the other is doing.
At some time after Alice and Bob perform their measurements, Victor makes a choice (the "delayed choice" in the name). He either allows his two photons from I and II to travel on without doing anything, or he combines them so that their polarization states are entangled.
A final measurement determines the polarization state of those two photons.
... Ma et al. found to a high degree of confidence that when Victor selected entanglement, Alice and Bob found correlated photon polarizations. This didn't happen when Victor left the photons alone.'
This is BULLSHIT. It's God, CHEATING.
God is such a dick.
I found teaching maths, at a primary school level, helped me to sharpen a lot of my basic knowledge, and get an appreciation for the complex yet always ultimately understandable symmetry of mathematics. From that, I found it easier to look into more advanced spheres of study in my own time.
But yeah, calculus...I can't imagine that would be very easy to learn on your own, at all.
Quote from: Cain on April 27, 2012, 06:26:47 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 26, 2012, 10:35:29 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 08:41:01 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 25, 2012, 08:34:53 PM
QUANTUM!
No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?
I think so. Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.
I have read that Timeless Physics page several times over the last 2 years, and I still do not understand it. Maybe time to use Feynmen self-teaching to get through to my brain.
I think I get it, on a conceptual level, but I want to go over the maths a bit more, because, statistics aside, I'm working with essentially high school level stuff, which is not ideal.
How did Feynman teach himself calculus, by the way? I'm aware that he did, but I've never seen anything on how he went about it.
http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-Practical-Mathematics-Self-Study-Series/dp/0442284896 He mentions that book in The Pleasure of Finding Things Out.
Quote from: Cain on April 25, 2012, 07:41:51 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 25, 2012, 06:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on April 25, 2012, 06:13:30 AM
Seriously? Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you? It's easy. The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly. Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled. It's simple!
Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"
I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.
Unless you adhere to Timeless Physics (http://lesswrong.com/lw/qp/timeless_physics/), yes.
Reading through it again, and if I understand correctly, the time element is unnecessary, it simply labels a unique configuration which will not be repeated. It is shorthand. It's not actually real. There is no 'outside' the system from which to observe the system, therefore, from the inside it feels as if things are directional as these unique, non-repeating configurations occur.
Now, in reference to the OP, there are these unique configurations. And photons of a given wavelength are identical, not this photon here and this photon there, but a photon here and a photon there. They are essentially the same photon, removed in space. And since every aspect of the experiment, including the measurement, the measurers, the equipment, the "decider", all exist in this configuration, not outside of it, they are all explicitly entangled. So, while I don't quite understand at a deep level how all events are superimposed, I can't visualize this, that the entanglement between all the components would have interactions of this sort does not set off alarm bells in my head, beyond that inability to visualize.
Placing "block-models" of time asdide, I think the idea of inverse causality is essentially very difficult to understand. With entanglement I tend to imagine some form of lateral or "sideways" causal direction. The mental block preventing my understanding of "simultaneous change" due to entanglement is already overtaken by my (insufficient) understanding of relativity. A photon under space/time Lorentzian contraction will always be both beyond and prior to my comprehension, purportedly.
Quote from: LuciferX on April 28, 2012, 05:21:41 PM
Placing "block-models" of time asdide, I think the idea of inverse causality is essentially very difficult to understand. With entanglement I tend to imagine some form of lateral or "sideways" causal direction. The mental block preventing my understanding of "simultaneous change" due to entanglement is already overtaken by my (insufficient) understanding of relativity. A photon under space/time Lorentzian contraction will always be both beyond and prior to my comprehension, purportedly.
It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 28, 2012, 10:55:38 PMIt's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.
Huh? What's this about sine waves? I might not know the details about Quantum theory, but are we talking about the mathematical function? Why it alternates? You mean like sin(x) is odd and cos(x) is even? In what sense do we not understand this?
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 29, 2012, 01:37:26 AM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 28, 2012, 10:55:38 PMIt's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.
Huh? What's this about sine waves? I might not know the details about Quantum theory, but are we talking about the mathematical function? Why it alternates? You mean like sin(x) is odd and cos(x) is even? In what sense do we not understand this?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1501838765715417418
As the thickness of a transparent piece of glass increases, the probability of photon reflection increases and decreases in a sine wave like pattern. In that video, Feynman explains what things look like, as well as that he doesn't understand why the universe works this way.
oooh amplitudes of light, I thought the amplitude of a sinewave itself, I already thought that was weird. will watch the video later.
Google Video still exists? Sorry, but I find that rather surprising.
Quote from: Cain on April 29, 2012, 02:51:10 PM
Google Video still exists? Sorry, but I find that rather surprising.
I googled it, and that was the first thing that came up. Here's the Youtube equivalent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g
Posting here because
Quote from: Kai on April 28, 2012, 10:55:38 PM
It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.
There is something
very interesting about that question, and, given I have the monopoly on ALL of them, I wanted to make sure it did not slip through the cracks. Difficult, but not impossible?