h a l f b a k e r yA few slices short of a loaf.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
New scientist has an article where quantum linked photons image a figure where the detector is far from the figurine. Go High Energy!
I think using high energy radiographic photons could thus image things like minerals at depth with some distance
Think how scanning a collimated beam of high
energy photons like those from the "sticky tape" radiography effect could show where various minerals were, perhaps at some depth, across an entire landscape. Cheaper minerals would make things more affordable everywhere particularly benefitting the developing world.
The military could detect IED at a distance
gold prospectors would have a nifty new way to find gold. Imagine a gold miner with a new Quantumseek 5000 that actually sees a few feet through dirt or streambeds to describe the location of gold.
Truth seekers could make live radiographic movies of groups of people with a contactless distance polygraph
Although the amounts of radiation are not described yet this technology could also be used to mass screen breast cancer, persons who thought the radiation risk permissable could just walk to a unstaffed area that would autoradiograph to detect wellness at a distance
Theres even greater capability if the photons are quantum linked to neutrinos or atoms
New Scientist Quantum imaging article
http://www.newscien...com/article/dn13825
the quantum linked photon image goes wow [beanangel, Jan 18 2012]
a radiographic angiogram doing this with quantum linked photons goes with distance polygraphy
http://www.youtube....zvM&feature=related
[beanangel, Jan 18 2012]
Hawking's latest book
http://www.hawking.org.uk/
Best description I've seen of quantum entanglement. [csea, Jan 18 2012]
schematic of emission with detection at different area
http://tinypic.com/r/2meoihf/5
[beanangel, Jan 18 2012]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
I'm beginning to be able to translate [beanangel]-speak. The title needs at least an (implied) verb! |
|
| |
Finding minerals with Radiographic quantum linked imaging results in cheaper minerals and greater prosperity. |
|
| |
The rest of the idea needs similar editing, but I need to reread Stephen Hawking's latest [link]. |
|
| |
The very appreciable thing about Shihs paper as well as the quantum transmission of data across a few hundred kilometers is the ability to have the detector distant from the linked photon. Thus the detector is able to be on the raymaker side rather than behind the imaged object. Quantum linked imaging completely skips reflection or interception to detect. Graphic at link. |
|
| |
I didn't read Shih's paper but I read the linked article
about it. It seems trivial to me, and not at all
necessarily quantum. If I understand it correctly, it's
equivalent to the following classical/macroscopic
experiment: |
|
| |
1. You have two lasers that are mounted such that
they can be aimed up/down and left/right, and their
beams will always be parallel to each other. |
|
| |
2. In front of one laser you put an image sensor. |
|
| |
3. In front of the other laser, you put your object that
you want to take a photo of. Next to this object you
put another sensor that reports only when the laser is
shining on the object, but not where on the object it
is shining. |
|
| |
4. You move the lasers around at random or in a
rectilinear or other pattern. |
|
| |
5. When the sensor next to the object reports that
the object is being illuminated, it sends a signal to the
image sensor to record a white pixel wherever its laser
is currently shining on it. Pixels start black. Each time
it records a white pixel it adds it to the image. |
|
| |
6. When you've moved the laser beam over the entire
object, the image sensor will have recorded an image
of the silhouette of the object. |
|
| |
7. You can upgrade the sensor next to the object to
report brightness, and then have the image sensor
record that brightness instead of just white. Then you
get a monochrome image instead of a 1-bit one. |
|
| |
Anyway, the crucial point as I see it is that there's a
sensor next to the object. The impression I got from
your description of it was that there was no sensor
next to the object, and the photons that struck the
object modified the state of their entangled partners
that went to the image sensor. That's not how
entanglement works, as I understand it—you can't use
entanglement to communicate by modifying the state
of one particle and looking at the state of the other
one elsewhere to see if it changed, because as soon as
you modify one of the entangled particles, the
particles just become disentangled. |
|
| |