Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

In reply to the discussion: No more quantum politics [View all]

mindwalker_i

(4,407 posts)
24. Yeah, the idea is to create entangled pair and send one stream through a double-slit
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:26 PM
Oct 2015

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.

No more quantum politics [View all] hootinholler Oct 2015 OP
........ daleanime Oct 2015 #1
I need to share this. Well done. azmom Oct 2015 #2
The Clinton Uncertainty Principle. Nice! n/t lumberjack_jeff Oct 2015 #3
HRC - The Quantum Candidate - She Is Till She Is Not cantbeserious Oct 2015 #4
The real problem is her entanglement with Big Finance mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #5
Spooky action at a distance has been confirmed as a real phenomenon Electric Monk Oct 2015 #6
Eventually, we should be able to do faster than light communications with the phenomena n/t hootinholler Oct 2015 #8
Use the subspace frequencies, Mister Worf! hifiguy Oct 2015 #11
I'm working on that mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #13
Why not? hifiguy Oct 2015 #17
For the record, they outclass me by far mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #26
Seriously??? hootinholler Oct 2015 #19
Yeah, the idea is to create entangled pair and send one stream through a double-slit mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #24
Apparent action at a distance hootinholler Oct 2015 #7
I always have to jump into discussions involving quantum mechanics :) mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #14
At least it is highly probable that you do. hifiguy Oct 2015 #18
Good point :) mindwalker_i Oct 2015 #25
Three quarks for Muster Mark! BeanMusical Oct 2015 #9
Professor Murray Gell-Mann hifiguy Oct 2015 #16
That is truly excellent, hoot! hifiguy Oct 2015 #10
Thanks! hootinholler Oct 2015 #12
I thought we settled on Heisenberg? Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #15
But, this has nothing to do with meth hootinholler Oct 2015 #20
I thought it was Heidelberg LastLiberal in PalmSprings Oct 2015 #22
This could easily lead to one hell of a sub-thread! Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #23
WAit a minute! gregcrawford Oct 2015 #21
"Schrodinger's Candidate" - consider this stolen Scootaloo Oct 2015 #27
but all of those superpac $ allow corporations to commit mhatrw Oct 2015 #28
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»No more quantum politics»Reply #24