HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » No more quantum politics

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:23 PM

No more quantum politics

I just can't vote for a Schrodinger's Candidate that holds multiple positions simultaneously until the ballot box is opened.

28 replies, 3064 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 28 replies Author Time Post
Reply No more quantum politics (Original post)
hootinholler Oct 2015 OP
daleanime Oct 2015 #1
azmom Oct 2015 #2
lumberjack_jeff Oct 2015 #3
cantbeserious Oct 2015 #4
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #5
Electric Monk Oct 2015 #6
hootinholler Oct 2015 #8
hifiguy Oct 2015 #11
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #13
hifiguy Oct 2015 #17
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #26
hootinholler Oct 2015 #19
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #24
hootinholler Oct 2015 #7
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #14
hifiguy Oct 2015 #18
mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #25
BeanMusical Oct 2015 #9
hifiguy Oct 2015 #16
hifiguy Oct 2015 #10
hootinholler Oct 2015 #12
Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #15
hootinholler Oct 2015 #20
LastLiberal in PalmSprings Oct 2015 #22
Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #23
gregcrawford Oct 2015 #21
Scootaloo Oct 2015 #27
mhatrw Oct 2015 #28

Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:28 PM

1. ........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:28 PM

2. I need to share this. Well done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:32 PM

3. The Clinton Uncertainty Principle. Nice! n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:49 PM

4. HRC - The Quantum Candidate - She Is Till She Is Not

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:03 PM

5. The real problem is her entanglement with Big Finance

She supports the wave function that's transferring money to those who already have it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Electric Monk (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:15 PM

8. Eventually, we should be able to do faster than light communications with the phenomena n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Reply #8)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:42 PM

11. Use the subspace frequencies, Mister Worf!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Reply #8)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:04 PM

13. I'm working on that

It looks like the universe is conspiring to keep us from using entanglement to transmit information, although I, perhaps foolishly, hope to find a way around it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mindwalker_i (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:08 PM

17. Why not?

 

The greatest scientific discoveries have always been made by solitary people thinking deeply about something for a long time and having a startling, profound insight: Newton, Maxwell, Einstein, Bohr, deBroglie, Heisenberg, Dirac....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #17)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:27 PM

26. For the record, they outclass me by far

I'm just some dude with a BBO, a couple of detectors, and a certain level of insanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mindwalker_i (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:09 PM

19. Seriously???

Mad props for that!

What's the major malfunction? As an engineering type it seem like it should work provided the entanglement isn't, for lack of a better term, consumed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Reply #19)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:26 PM

24. Yeah, the idea is to create entangled pair and send one stream through a double-slit

That should create an interference pattern. If, however, the other stream with the entangled pairs is measured in such a way as to "preserve the momentum information," it's akin to observing which slit the initial photons went through and destroys the interference. Birgit Dopfer did this in 1998.

A wrinkle in the experiment is that she useda coincidence detector (basically an AND gate) to filter out all the non-entangled photons. A guy, Dr. John Cramer, was working on developing a system that didn't need that coincidence detector, and what he found was that there is a kind of anti-signal which fills in the spaces in between the interference fringes and masks out the signal. I'm quite confused by this: how does it exactly mask it out, and if the coincidence detector filters the anti-signal out, how is it that the anti-signal responds to the measurement on the other stream? My conclusion was that I just had to build the damn thing and find out.

It seems to me like there should be some way around this problem, and I wonder whether there's some sort of pattern between entangled photons vs. non-entangled, anti-signal photons. Maybe there's a timing relationship? It seems highly likely that Cramer explored this fully, but I just can't let it go. Maybe it would be possible to train a neural network to detect some sort of difference that us humans don't otherwise see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mindwalker_i (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:11 PM

7. Apparent action at a distance

Yet, the appearance of a particle stream under observation is uncanny.

Props for following the principle postulation posted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Reply #7)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:05 PM

14. I always have to jump into discussions involving quantum mechanics :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mindwalker_i (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:09 PM

18. At least it is highly probable that you do.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #18)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:26 PM

25. Good point :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:14 PM

9. Three quarks for Muster Mark!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeanMusical (Reply #9)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:06 PM

16. Professor Murray Gell-Mann

 

appreciates this reference, along with a few of us science nerds on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:40 PM

10. That is truly excellent, hoot!

 



Brainiest joke/truth on DU in quite a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:57 PM

12. Thanks!

A tale of two threads.

It was the best of times. It was the worst of times...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:06 PM

15. I thought we settled on Heisenberg?

 

Maybe it was just me.






http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251657234#post96

^repost^

Star Member arcane1 (33,667 posts)

Response to Kokonoe (Reply #93)Thu Oct 8, 2015, 05:35 PM

96. Schrodinger's Candidate?




http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251657234#post152

^repost^

Motown_Johnny (18,825 posts)

Response to arcane1 (Reply #96)Thu Oct 8, 2015, 09:20 PM

152. Heisenberg's maybe.

No thing (that Hillary has stated) has a definite position, a definite trajectory, or a definite momentum.










Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:12 PM

20. But, this has nothing to do with meth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:15 PM

22. I thought it was Heidelberg



“Everybody's got to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer.” -- W.C. Fields

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LastLiberal in PalmSprings (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:18 PM

23. This could easily lead to one hell of a sub-thread!

 


"Once, during Prohibition, I was forced to live for days on nothing but food and water." -- W.C. Fields



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:13 PM

21. WAit a minute!

Why is this ballot box full of cat hair?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:29 PM

27. "Schrodinger's Candidate" - consider this stolen

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 03:55 PM

28. but all of those superpac $ allow corporations to commit

spooky actions at a distance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread