Quantum Entanglement

Status
Not open for further replies.
X

xmo1

Guest
1. What kind of equipment (I would like to see it, or the research derived from it.) can detect and measure the spin of a singular photon, if that is how it is done?<br /><br />2. Does QE break the limitations of spacetime effectively meaning that time travel is possible?<br /><br />3. If photons can travel both forward and backward wouldn't that mean that time travel would be possible in both directions?<br /><br />4. Is there any historical mathematical reference for physics pre-Newton forward? Saying: Here is Newton's mathematics. This was followed by "X, Y, and Z." - so that someone might have a mathematical guide (with a narrative description) to the work. Most of what I find is narrative, or the mathematics is presented in discrete form.<br /><br />Sorry I couldn't do a better job with this post. There is an event approaching my location that I must attend to (time for work). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>DenniSys.com</p> </div>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
Post deleted by kyle_baron <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
P

primordial

Guest
kyle_baron ! Quantum information conservation looks like the controlling entity, the spin of the photon translates to polarization and as I understand when the parent photon is split into two daughter photons the sum of their quantum information must be conserved irrelevant of the distance or events they encounter, and this information transfer happens very fast. I have not seen how fast in print as of now. <br />Just think about it " Planck speed". Ha.
 
P

primordial

Guest
xmo1 ! The only experiment I've seen in print was in Discover Magazine and for a shot time after that on the web in 1998. the experiment used a potassium neobate crystal to split the parent photon and send it down fiber optic cables in opposite directions over a distance of about 35 - 40 Km, when they changed the spin of one daughter photon at one end, the photon at the other end, changed its spin; with beyond measure speed at that time. If you are interested I can dig up the exact facts about those articles.
 
X

xmo1

Guest
Thank you. Not necessary. I have to do the research anyway. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>DenniSys.com</p> </div>
 
X

xmo1

Guest
"EPR" stands for Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, who introduced the thought experiment in a 1935 paper to argue that quantum mechanics is not a complete physical theory." EPR paradox - Wikipedia<br /><br />Note: Alice and Bob are a well known parametric field resonance coupling deciphered in multiple engineering disciplines. (ha^3) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>DenniSys.com</p> </div>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />kyle_baron ! Quantum information conservation looks like the controlling entity,<br /> the sum of their quantum information must be conserved irrelevant of the distance or events they encounter, and this information transfer happens very fast.</font><br /><br />First of all, there is NO Quantum information transfer. It's not information between 2 photons, it's a connection between the SAME photon in 2 different positions. I found this on You Tube, "Superposition":<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpQABLRCU_0 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
N

nimbus

Guest
Primordial, I'd like to see that article, if you don't mind. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
P

primordial

Guest
Nimbus ! It was in the 1998 January issue of Discover Magazine page 53 With color graphics. The setup of the experiment involved three seperate locations by Physicist Nicolas Gisin's team at the University of Geneva. Gisin and his coleagues borrowed fiber-optic phone lines running from Geneva to two nearby villages. In Geneva, they shone photons into a potassium niobate crystal, which split each photon into a pair of less energetic photons traveling in opposite directions-one north toward Bellevue and the other southwest to Bernex. At these two destinations, nearly seven miles apart, each photon was fed into a detector. Common sense would suggest that nothing done to the photon in Bellevue could affect the photon in Bernex, or vice versa, but quantum mechanics never had much to do with common sense. For starters, the uncertainty principle says that Gisin cannot simultaneously know both the energy of a photon and the time it left the crystal in Geneva, at least not precisley. Furthermore, quantum mechanics insists that the photons don't have precise properties until they are measured. To show what he saw as the absurdity of the claim, Einstein proposed a simple thought experiment in 1935 (EPR), and this became the basis for Gisin's complicated real one. Einstein believed that the uncertainty principle was just a measurement problem, not a reality problem. His idea, in terms of the Geneva experiment, was that you could learn the energy of one photon by measuring the energy of the other one far away; by the same token, you could learn a photon's arrival time by measuring that of its distant counterpart. After all, the two photons had to leave Geneva at the same time, and although their energies might not be equal, they have to add up to the energy of the parent photon. Assuming that these measurements
 
P

primordial

Guest
kyle_baron ! Yes and no, it's much like the leading edge of a wave front to the trailing edge of the same wave front. Both are very much related, but yet seperate events.<br />
 
R

R1

Guest
I did not know experiments had already been done, I'm so glad somebody already did.<br /><br /><br />As I understand it, though, this cannot be used to send information from point A to point B instantaneously,<br />because once the observer at point B observes his arriving package, he unintentionally tampers with it in order to <br />see which way it's spinning, so any change to the photon he gets has to happen before it reaches him. In fact so does <br />observer A, when he checks his package to see which way his clone is spinning, he unintentionally messes with it,<br />so any changes he wants on the clones he must do before either clone is measured. I think all that can be<br />sent across great distances instantaneously (in the 'basic' 3 dimensions) is old knowledge, not information.<br /><br /><br />I could be wrong, but that's the way I understand it. If this is correct, then we only need now<br />to invent a method using Qentanglement to send information instantaneously across large distances.<br /><br /><br /><br />I have some questions, is it possible to have a filter like a polarizer or homogenizer that sends 'only' photons of<br />identity #1 to observer B? <br /><br />Is it possible to keeps lots of photons in storage for years? For example so that observer A can store all his<br />clones untampered for years, such as in circular fibers or something, so that years later he can encode them<br />so that observer B light years away can receive recently encoded photons? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
P

primordial

Guest
John1R ! I do not have the article in my hand at this time but information via fiber-optic cable in a certain mode has been sent. I think they were using it in an attempt to prevent data theft, however the article acknowledged that methods of theft were still possible with this system; at the time the article was written they were working on that problem. I will try to locate that article.<br /> I located the article. The experiment took place at Boston University in Cambridge, Mass. by Martin Jaspan. The title was " A quantum security leap, encryption system promising as computer-snooping shield" . If you want more I can send more. The system uses single photon quantum synchronization and are being sold by a company named MagiQ Technologies.
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />the leading edge of a wave front to the trailing edge of the same wave front. Both are very much related, but yet seperate events. </font><br /><br />I agree with you about the leading and trailing edge of the wavefront, but they're not seperate events. The reason that you can not seperate a photon in half, is because a photon is the smallest bundle of energy. What the experiments do, is seperate the wavelengths in half. But, because of Feynman's Sum over paths, the wavelength isn't really seperated (it is optically seperated, but not Quantumly seperated). Sum over paths = all possible paths = all over the entire universe.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sum-over-paths <br /><br />As I said before: It's the SAME photon, It's the SAME photon, It's the SAME photon..................... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
P

primordial

Guest
kyle_baron ! Kyle any fundamental photon is comprised of an infinite sum of photons with lesser energy which are dependant on the relativistic mass of the fundamental photon relative to an observer who can measure its frequency or fundamental wave length. To me seperation into two is to use the upper bandwidth and the lower bandwith or a mix of means and extremes of the same fundamental photon, thus keeping the quantum atributes and their relationship in space-time. yes it is the same photon, yes it is the same photon. <br />
 
K

kelvinzero

Guest
Here is an example of a toy we will probably actually be able to build that uses quantum entanglement.<br /><li>It consists of two identical tic-tak-toe boards (3x3) full of 0 and X.<li>Their patterns are hidden, however you can ask to see any one row or any one column.<li>If we ask to see a row of one box and a column of the other, they will give a consistent result for the square shared by that row and column.<li>What ever row we expose is certain to contain an even number of X's<li>What ever column we expose is certain to contain an odd number of X's<li>These properties hold regardless of how far apart the boxes are when 'opened'<br /><br />This is simply impossible to do classically. They cant be communicating by radiowaves because the trick still works if they are opened simultaneously and lightyears apart. The obvious (and only) way to get whichever row and column they choose to open to not conflict is to store an identical pattern in both. But there is no way to fill a 3x3 board with even X's in rows and odd X's in columns. This is because if you have a pattern where each row contains an even number of X's, the total number of X's on the board must be even, ie the result of adding three even numbers. Likewise if all the columns are odd the total number of X's must be odd.<br /><br />There you go. Totally impossible. Now I challenge you to find a use for this damn thing <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /></li></li></li></li></li></li>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />To me seperation into two is to use the upper bandwidth and the lower bandwith or a mix of means and extremes of the same fundamental photon, thus keeping the quantum atributes and their relationship in space-time. yes it is the same photon, yes it is the same photon. </font><br /><br />Now, you're getting the correct view of the idea. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Yes, it's the same photon; yes, it's the same photon.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />"Sum over paths = all possible paths = all over the entire universe". <br /><br />I have a comment on this expression. <br />I do not believe we can say "all over the entire universe". This because the photon is a timed event. Its position (even superposition) has only a limited part of space it can exist in. </font><br /><br />True, if it's a timed event, then it was observed, and it's position is known. Therefore, the quantum state of the photon wave, has collapsed into a particle.<br /><br />But, when the photon is not observed, it's quantum state is intact. And in this state, the photon exists as a probability wave, over the entire universe!<br /><br />Then we have to talk about other dimensions, for this photon probability wave, in it's quantum state. But that's another topic....<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
M

mindmute

Guest
Oh, It's called Q.E. now. Glad to see after all these years that someone is picking up on this. Has anyone considered that all the photons in the big bang were associated, and perhaps warped back on to themselves?
 
P

primordial

Guest
kyle_baron ! True, if it's a timed event, then it was observed, and it's position is known. Therefore, the quantum state of the photon wave, has collapsed into a particle. <br /><br />But, when the photon is not observed, it's quantum state is intact. And in this state, the photon exists as a probability wave, over the entire universe! <br /> <br />Yes, this is true only after It's observed by an observer, will it present its energy (or frequency shift) relative to the observer, as a specific photon event, until then it carries quantum info. only, that can be used to construct a photon event in any inertial platform. The photon event you get is a result of the relative gradiant between the initial source event and the final photon event.
 
R

R1

Guest
interesting, but IMO the photon remains in our 3 D, I think that's the current thought.<br /><br />Electromagnetic energy cannot seep outside of 3 D, whereas a little bit of gravity can seep in.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">If this complete layer is a sort of "quantum dimension" it is more easy to understand why a quantum state appearantly move timeless within this boundary.</font><br /><br />IMO you're correct, the quantum state need not move timeless within that boundary,<br />because it need not move at all, that's the key feature of the non 3 D dimensions. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />For example, we have 3 D, this is where the interference happens, or whatever it is that happens, that causes us to think we<br />perceive a particle, but now dimension 3D+q (what you refer to as a layer, sort of quantum dimension), is<br />not in 3d space, it is outside of space in fact (or at least outside of the old space, that we used to call 4d spacetime, or 3d space, etc),<br /><br />This 3dq dimension does not have the spatial canstraints of our 3d to hamper the connection, or entanglement, as it is called,<br />so it need not travel the spatial distance that the photon does, I can understand it may be difficult to grasp,<br />to this day I'm trying to have a clear view of this myself. It get's even better, because the thought is that there are more,<br />for example 3D+R, S, and others.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
R

R1

Guest
I was referring to string interference, or whatever event it is, that causes a particle to be perceived only at the <br />3 D point of a Kaluza-Klein manifold.<br /><br />I know, xmo1 asked about photons, and that's making it more difficult for me, I need a lot of help myself when<br />dealing with photons. My first immediate thought is that if the photon did not exists in 3D, then it, too, would<br />not be constrained by 3D spatial nature. And thus far, I think that it is, IMO that's why a photon cannot escape a black hole,<br />why sunlight takes 8 minutes or so to reach us, why light from distant galaxies appears red-shifted. For the most<br />part I think it's the propagation speed limit. In other words my immediate thought is that I would expect the photon<br />to disobey the speed limit rule, and instead travel via quantum entanglement. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />Now...The quantum state is said to be existing "all over the universe" as a definition. Mathematically we may say that, but in most of the universe the probability of detecting the photon is zero.</font><br /><br />I would say, not only mathematically, but in reality also. Otherwise, we're back to a photon traveling FTL, through our 4-D space, which is impossible. The reason we can't detect the photon wave, is because we have to use other photons in 4-D space, to collapse that quantum wave at the point where we want to see it!<br /><font color="yellow"><br />Its probability wave (probabiliy /> 0) exist in a layer (or thin shell) surrounding the emitter expanding at C. From the the emitters point of view the complete shell exists in exactly the same moment in time (in its history). If this complete layer is a sort of "quantum dimension" it is more easy to understand why a quantum state appearantly move timeless within this boundary.</font><br /><br />Maybe, maybe not. I personally don't agree with this quantum shell idea, surrounding the photon wave. This would restrict the photon wave with in a capsule of "special spacial dimension". I think this "special spacial dimension" exists over the entire universe, rather than each photon creating this new quantum dimensional shell.<br /><br />Entanglement doesn't know about distance (light years), or energy loss over that distance. So entanglement must cover the entire universe. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY