h a l f b a k e r yNo serviceable parts inside.
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,
|
|
|
My new query is, how can the apparatus be treated as independent?. In classical physics the bullet leaves the gun and then has no effect on the slit until it touches or passes through. A Newtonian wave has no effect also until reaching the slit.
A quantum object has a quantum field interaction. That
field is always touching the gun and the slit simultaneously. To treat it classically and only say it interacts with classical locality seems strange.
To me the box is part of the quantum object, the emitter is a tap, an observer is a sink hole and the quantum object a pattern traveling the all touching field affected by all.
Is it possible to design the box to reflect and concentrate any unmeasured field effects onto the slits? to gain more insight on what is happening.
Elitzur-Vaidman Bomb Tester
https://en.wikipedi...Vaidman_bomb_tester
This device seems relevant to what you describe. [sninctown, Aug 04 2019]
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:
|
| |
You assume that time is linear and travels in the direction your senses tells you it does. |
|
| |
If the multiverse is real then all outcomes are predetermined and merely fill in various ways to achieve those outcomes and us poor carbon based units just can't think backwards is all. |
|
| |
Everything is backwards. Always has been. That's why you gotta flip the negatives. |
|
| |
[sninctown] I love the quantum logic of the Elitzur–Vaidman bomb tester, there are 3 possible
results: A) The bomb goes off, it was definitely a bomb. B) The bomb doesn't go off, it might be a
dud and C) The bomb doesn't go off, and it might be a live bomb. |
|
| |
After testing an infinite number of bombs, and keeping careful track of the test results and making
the appropriate deductions, it's possible to ascertain that up to 33% of the *unexploded* bombs are
live, and liable to go off. You can also ascertain with 100% certainty that the laboratory will want
cleaning up afterwards. |
|
| |
Even the diagram in that link tries to cram what should be a whole new way of thinking in two Newtonian-like paths. Not that I know what the thinking should be but the diagram seems wrong for the word entanglement. |
|
| |
I'm really ignorant, but could a continuum of soliton to
highly dissipative photonic pulse improve understanding
of the double slit experiment and produce new
technologies; |
|
| |
basically see if solitons caused greater or lesser likeliness
of a particular W/P version: do this at a particle/wave
apparatus that is optical bench adjusted to always have
half the observations come out particle, if there is any
variation in waveform that causes say a shift to 60% from
50% that would be new to me, and could perhaps be
informative and technology producing. |
|
| |
It is likely already published but what is the effect of
putting 10,000 simultaneously quantum entangled (linked)
photons through a 50% particle double-slit-like apparatus;
it could be that if the first photon gets either W or P
treatment all the quantum linked photons that
subsequently meet the detector are "cajoled" into
identical W/P identity causing a 10,000 event data
homogeneity, very detectable and far different (99.999%)
than the 50% that would be expected from the apparatus.
that could suggest new technologies like improved laser
detectors at photonic internet (quantum entanglement
improves detectability, permitting further apart
repeaters) |
|
| |
More data capacity, beyond the data capacity of bits with
entangled W/P effects: It is possible quantum
entanglement could cause additional data space to be
available at photonics above and beyond the
mathematical data capacity of binary (0/1), that would
make a data representation and computational basis that
actually stored and contained, more information than just
bits, and exceed what I perceive are the writings of
Shannon on how much communications space is available
to a system. |
|
| |