h a l f b a k e r yThe word "How?" springs to mind at this point.
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,
|
|
|
Okay, people have told me this isn't how Quantum Entanglement works.
But I think maybe we will discover it does work this way.
Anyways, if device can scan your atoms and quantum entangle all the atoms in your body with an equal amount of atoms (and then controlled by a quantum computer) you could
monitor all bodily processes.
A quantum tricorder
[link]
|
| |
But we didn't go past the sheep. |
|
| |
1) A supercomputer that models the interactions of all of the atoms of a person's body. |
|
| |
2) Someone in a white coat who says "Say ahhh". |
|
| |
Anyway, this would work best for quantum prankstering, simply entangle all the atoms of the real and test bodies of the victim, then inject alcohol at appropriate moments, like job interviews, when giving wedding speeches, during tv interviews and so on. |
|
| |
Maybe I'll read futher into entanglement. But...if you measure two entangled particles at exactly the same time, then the entanglement should be flummoxed. If you measure them in sequence, how do you know those states didn't predate the measurement? Generally speaking, not with the special particles for which it's said to apply. |
|
| |
Every time I read about Quantumum, I realize I have no clue. Except this once. Won't work. |
|
| |
There's no way of telling, from quantum entanglement, what the particles are doing. They could be long gone. |
|
| |
There doesn't seem to be anything in this idea in
between the "Why don't we..." and the "... like this." |
|
| |
I have got a sneaking suspicion more detail is needed on quantum foam and entanglement will come out in the wash. |
|
| |