- #1
afstgl
- 23
- 0
Hi there, I am on high school physics level and came here to have a few questions answered that keep boggling my mind and challenging my standards of logic... please keep explanations simple, since I don't have any extensive knowledge of QM and English is not native to me, thanks...
_______________________
1 - Quantum entanglement - is it even real:
I got sick and tired of witnessing utter misconception about quantum entanglement, the web is full of people who are actually convinced entangled particle means manipulations to one particle continuously transfer to the other, so you can continuously jerk one particle and all effects will simultaneously be mirrored to the second particle...
From what I read about entanglement - any manipulation, measurement or whatever to either of the particles destroys the entanglement, which brings me to the logical question, if we have a system of two particles and only one measurement allowed, how do we even confirm entanglement, I mean in order to account for a change we must measure the initial and final conditions of both particles in order to account for any changes which take place? Yet we have only one measurement, of one particle, and no way of knowing anything about the system prior to that measurement, since any measurement breaks the entanglement, common logic dictates it is theoretically and practically impossible to attain tangible evidence of it...
I read that when two particles are created/emitted simultaneously, standard physics conservation of energy dictates they are created in opposite states, and that is what entangled means, but just because two identical particles are created simultaneously in opposition to one another, it doesn't mean they are entangled. I can set two 12 hour timers one at 12 and one at 6 o'clock and activate them simultaneously, then send them on the opposite sides of the globe concealed in boxes and claim they are entangled, and opening the box to verify that breaks the entanglement so both clocks assume opposite states, which were BTW their initial states... but that doesn't mean they are entangled, they have just been synced up...
So how do we know anything about 2 entangled particles prior to their measurement, how do we verify in a tangible, empirical way they were indeed entangled, if one single measurement of a 4 bit system is all we have? Considering both were in opposition since the moment of their creation, and since they are the same and with the same let's say spin cycle rate, it is only logical for them to be in opposition in the moment of the supposed disentanglement even if there was no entanglement to begin with.
_______________________
2 - The Quantum Machine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_machine
(PDF thesis attached on bottom)
I recently watched a TED presentation by one Aaron D. O'Connell, who spent 8 minutes trying to convince the crowd that quantum mechanics also apply to macroscopic objects, in a rather unscientific and deprived of any actual information way, he began with new age left brain/right brain stuff, went through a series of preposterous metaphors and finished with experiencing being at different locations at the same time, so I immediately turned extremely skeptical, and I was very surprised to learn his machine was credited "Breakthrough of the Year" by Science in 2010.
To keep it short - he made a piezoelectric macro resonator, supercooled it to its ground state, and claims to have successfully measured it to be in a state of quantum superposition of quote "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time"
When a piezoelectric element vibrates, it outputs current, and I kind of wonder what type of an output curve does "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time" output, plotted on a voltage/time graph?
I'd suggest the type of curve it might be can very easily be the product of interference between 2 frequencies, giving a modulated third frequency as a sum, and keeping in mind he used a dielectric resonator, 2 materials would suggest 2 different resonance frequencies superimposed over each other, the sum of both creates a third frequency, that is more than capable of creating the illusion of "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time" - a state of quantum superposition applied to a macroscopic object - if so this experiment is anything but a breakthrough of the year, but somehow it doesn't seem like a plausible scenario, it is just too absurd to be true...
So my question is, where is the actual evidence it was indeed a case of quantum superposition and not just a few nanoseconds worth of illusion/error/misinterpretation or whatever?
1x0 in advance
_______________________
1 - Quantum entanglement - is it even real:
I got sick and tired of witnessing utter misconception about quantum entanglement, the web is full of people who are actually convinced entangled particle means manipulations to one particle continuously transfer to the other, so you can continuously jerk one particle and all effects will simultaneously be mirrored to the second particle...
From what I read about entanglement - any manipulation, measurement or whatever to either of the particles destroys the entanglement, which brings me to the logical question, if we have a system of two particles and only one measurement allowed, how do we even confirm entanglement, I mean in order to account for a change we must measure the initial and final conditions of both particles in order to account for any changes which take place? Yet we have only one measurement, of one particle, and no way of knowing anything about the system prior to that measurement, since any measurement breaks the entanglement, common logic dictates it is theoretically and practically impossible to attain tangible evidence of it...
I read that when two particles are created/emitted simultaneously, standard physics conservation of energy dictates they are created in opposite states, and that is what entangled means, but just because two identical particles are created simultaneously in opposition to one another, it doesn't mean they are entangled. I can set two 12 hour timers one at 12 and one at 6 o'clock and activate them simultaneously, then send them on the opposite sides of the globe concealed in boxes and claim they are entangled, and opening the box to verify that breaks the entanglement so both clocks assume opposite states, which were BTW their initial states... but that doesn't mean they are entangled, they have just been synced up...
So how do we know anything about 2 entangled particles prior to their measurement, how do we verify in a tangible, empirical way they were indeed entangled, if one single measurement of a 4 bit system is all we have? Considering both were in opposition since the moment of their creation, and since they are the same and with the same let's say spin cycle rate, it is only logical for them to be in opposition in the moment of the supposed disentanglement even if there was no entanglement to begin with.
How do we measure and confirm that? How do we measure it is instantaneous, how do we measure a change in the second particle if we know nothing about its prior state?When two particles are entangled, measurements performed on one of them immediately affect the other
_______________________
2 - The Quantum Machine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_machine
(PDF thesis attached on bottom)
I recently watched a TED presentation by one Aaron D. O'Connell, who spent 8 minutes trying to convince the crowd that quantum mechanics also apply to macroscopic objects, in a rather unscientific and deprived of any actual information way, he began with new age left brain/right brain stuff, went through a series of preposterous metaphors and finished with experiencing being at different locations at the same time, so I immediately turned extremely skeptical, and I was very surprised to learn his machine was credited "Breakthrough of the Year" by Science in 2010.
To keep it short - he made a piezoelectric macro resonator, supercooled it to its ground state, and claims to have successfully measured it to be in a state of quantum superposition of quote "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time"
When a piezoelectric element vibrates, it outputs current, and I kind of wonder what type of an output curve does "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time" output, plotted on a voltage/time graph?
I'd suggest the type of curve it might be can very easily be the product of interference between 2 frequencies, giving a modulated third frequency as a sum, and keeping in mind he used a dielectric resonator, 2 materials would suggest 2 different resonance frequencies superimposed over each other, the sum of both creates a third frequency, that is more than capable of creating the illusion of "literally vibrated a little and a lot at the same time" - a state of quantum superposition applied to a macroscopic object - if so this experiment is anything but a breakthrough of the year, but somehow it doesn't seem like a plausible scenario, it is just too absurd to be true...
So my question is, where is the actual evidence it was indeed a case of quantum superposition and not just a few nanoseconds worth of illusion/error/misinterpretation or whatever?
1x0 in advance