why we need ghosts

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by birch, Feb 27, 2016.

  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,176
    Nope. It does not confirm FTL communication. It demonstrates the speed of propagation of SPAAD/QE, which is not communication. You are conflating SPAAD with communication; they are not the same.

    Here's a good writeup to explain it:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/chador...faster-than-light-communication/#1be3b4993a1e
    Summary:
    "The end result is always the same, though: While it's one of the weirdest and coolest phenomena in physics, there is no way to use quantum entanglement to send messages faster than the speed of light."
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,004
    It's the exact same property that was measured in the 2008 experiment--the communication or information exchange between two photons. I'm not conflating anything. The experiments confirm each other.

    https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,176
    It is not communication. It is quantum entanglement. They are not the same.

    You have some learning to do. Here's another place to start:

    Quantum entanglement is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more objects have to be described with reference to each other, even though the individual objects may be spatially separated. This leads to correlations between observable physical properties of the systems.

    For example, it is possible to prepare two particles in a single quantum state such that when one is observed to be spin-up, the other one will always be observed to be spin-down and vice versa, this despite the fact that it is impossible to predict, according to quantum mechanics, which set of measurements will be observed.

    As a result, measurements performed on one system seem to be instantaneously influencing other systems entangled with it.

    But quantum entanglement does not enable the transmission of classical information faster than the speed of light.​


    https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/quantum_entanglement.htm
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,004
    It's not classical information. It's quantum information, and it is transmitted faster than the speed of light as these two experiments demonstrate.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,176
    Yes, it is. It is not useful (i.e. 'classical') information. You cannot use it to send information (i.e. a message of any type) to someone else at faster than the speed of light.
     
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,873
    At least we're not talking magic anymore.....small step in the right direction....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,176
    Agreed. I just have to keep in mind that I am trying to explain science to someone who believes in ghosts. But progress is progress.
     
  11. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,117
    Now now he like my post of the frozen trousers in the snow as being ghost wearing pants despite the hard time I gave him over the helicopter

    So leave him alone - he is becoming older (as we all are) and perhaps some SciFor is seeping in

    You go MR

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,004
    Such are the hazards of believing strictly by the evidence..You know, how they used to do science?
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,194
    Not at all. And the people who actually did the experiment don't claim faster-than-light communication, either. They agree with me.

    No, they really don't, I'm afraid. Apart from anything else, information transfer would violate relativity, like I said. So far, no experiment has shown FTL information transfer, which makes Einstein's theory all the more impressive, in my opinion.

    Nothing is "obvious" until you make it so.

    See if you can turn up a peer-reviewed paper that claims FTL communication via entanglement. I dare you.
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,194
    Yes, but that's not a transfer of information. That's concerned with the propagation of the quantum correlation that results in measurements of entangled particles.

    There's no "communication". Quantum entanglement setups like this one cannot be used to transmit a message, for example. In fact, no such setup can use entanglement to transmit a message faster than light. Or, at least, nobody has ever demonstrated any arrangement by which that occurs.
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,873
    If we look at this from a different perspective, could we make a case that "entanglement" may indicate a relationship which does not recognize spatial separation as a distance at all and affects both particles simultaneously regardless of a metric distance between them. That would solve the mystery, no?
     
  16. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,004
    That's basically what Bell's equations proved---that the quantum realm is essentially non-local and doesn't depend on distance in space or even in time.

    https://curiosity.com/topics/entangled-quantum-particles-can-communicate-through-time-curiosity/
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,873
    Maybe James can answer this question. Entangled particles are either in a state of 1 or 0, and changing one particle from 1 to 0 changes the other particle from 0 to 1.

    But what does that even mean? I can understand the binary nature of computers, where 1 = ON and 0 = OFF.
    But that specifically means 1 = electrical charge and 0 = nothing!!! Energy vs No Energy, a dynamic mathematical format.

    With entangled particles, does that mean when one particle is in a state of ON, the other particle is in a state of OFF? Or do both particles exist in an undetermined superposition, which means that a collapse to one state automatically means a collapse of the other to the opposite state when measured? What does it mean to be in opposite states?

    But as I understand it, when we intentionally change one particle, we break the entanglement and the particles may lose their opposite states!
    This is really confusing. How can we ever tell when particles are entangled and when their entanglement is broken?

    If one particle exists, the other does not exist? A quantum phenomenon?
    Has anyone ever tried to reverse the process and is that possible?

    If that is not the case, then what do the symbols 1 and 0 mean in this context?
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,194
    No. Prior to measurement, whether one particle's state is 0 or 1 is undetermined. What we find for entangled particles is that their measured states are correlated (for example, if one is in state 0, the other is always found to be in state 1).

    In practice, electrical signals are often taken to represent a binary 0 when the voltage is between 0 and 0.8 V, and a binary 1 when the voltage is between 2 V and 5 V. Voltages between 0.8 V and 2 V indicate that something is wrong with the circuitry.

    Your statement about the superposition is the correct one.

    It's not just when we intentionally change one; it's when a measurement happens. That is, as soon as you look to answer the question "Is particle A in state 0 or state 1?" then the state of particle B will thereafter be determined to be in the "opposite" state (if we're assuming that's how they are entangled).

    Real-world experiments involve preparing particles (often photons) in entangled states, physically separating them, then measuring.

    There's no way to tell from a measurement that a particle used to be entangled. Of course, you can check for correlations with other particles, if you have some reason to expect that such correlations might exist.

    You need at least two particles to have entangled particles.

    You mean go back to the state before the measurement was made and the state collapsed? Quantum mechanics says that's not possible. Following a measurement, you have to start from scratch, preparing a new entangled system.
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,873
    But where is that different from Einstein's original intuitive example of the gloves?
    If I have a pair of gloves and without looking I send each in different directions into space. At this point the gloves are superposed and only when we look inside the box of one glove can we tell if it is the left or right glove and the other automatically is the other hand glove. Now the gloves are no longer superposed and have collapsed into their original states. That's it.
    If I turn one glove inside out, the other will surely not turn inside out also. The entanglement has collapsed into fixed reality.......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,176
    They still do. Which is why usable information cannot be transmitted via QE.
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,194
    That's not a superposition.

    That example involves a "hidden variable", which determines which box contains the right glove and which contains the left glove. The outcome of the measurement (opening the box) was determined long before the measurement itself.

    Quantum mechanics has been shown to be inconsistent with hidden variables. It's as if the "decision" as to which glove is in which box is only made at the instant of measurement. In fact, there have been lots of "delayed-choice" experiments done in which the decision as to what kind of measurement will occur is not made until long after the particles in question have separated. Yet the correlations are still observed.

    The quantum behaviour cannot be reproduced by a classical experiment like the one you describe with the gloves.
     
    Write4U likes this.

Share This Page