It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by badw0lf
When I look at my glass of wine here, I don't affect it's state. It's nearly empty. Only by interfering with it can I change that state.
So the world around us does not change when we observe it.
Originally posted by -PLB-
He says (9:40) not the fact that we do know which slit the particle went through, but the fact that we can know makes the interference pattern collapse. So recording or not recording has no effect on the interference pattern collapsing.
But just after that (10:15) he says that you will get an interference pattern when you erase the data. But I think that is a slip of tongue.
Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by Korg Trinity
I just read the Wikipedia article, and can recommend it to anyone. To me it was much more clear than the video. It is indeed an amazing experiment. The first question that pops to my mind though is, what does this BBO do exactly? Can't it be that the BBO causes some photon pairs to behave like a particle and some like a wave? And then the wavelike photons go through the beam splitter, and the particle like photons do not. Anyway, this is just me trying to rationalize the results of this experiment.
Originally posted by -PLB-
To be honest, it doesn't really help , I thought the BBO only splits one photon into an entangled photon pair?
Originally posted by UmbraSumus
Originally posted by badw0lf
When I look at my glass of wine here, I don't affect it's state. It's nearly empty. Only by interfering with it can I change that state.
So the world around us does not change when we observe it.
To see the the glass of wine do you not require it to reflect light from the object which then passes through the cornea of the eye, to be processed.
Now i realise you said that "When I look at my glass of wine here, I don't affect it's state " ........ but don`t we need to interact with the object to measure/observe it. e.g To see the glass of wine do we not need it bathed in electromagnetic radiation ?
Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Originally posted by -PLB-
He says (9:40) not the fact that we do know which slit the particle went through, but the fact that we can know makes the interference pattern collapse. So recording or not recording has no effect on the interference pattern collapsing.
But just after that (10:15) he says that you will get an interference pattern when you erase the data. But I think that is a slip of tongue.
Very well spotted And yep was a slip of the tongue as the experiment results are very clear.
In a nutshell...
When the two entangled photons hit the detector where it is not possible to know which slit it came from, it does creates the interference pattern.
Yet if one of the entangled photons is detected through the other detectors that can tell which slit the photon went through then the wave function collapses.
Which means that the act of detection is not what collapses the wave function...
Simply mind blowing stuff indeed
Korg.
[edit on 6-8-2010 by Korg Trinity]
Originally posted by badw0lf
People are taking my comment waaayy to far.
Originally posted by badw0lf
What experiment. I have seen no evidence that there has been documented experiments to prove this. Quite the contrary, in fact.
Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Originally posted by badw0lf
People are taking my comment waaayy to far.
Well how about this little thought...
When you are not looking at the glass, the glass is full, empty, and both at the same time....
But as I mentioned earlier... when you are not looking is there a glass at all??
Korg.
Originally posted by -PLB-
Originally posted by badw0lf
What experiment. I have seen no evidence that there has been documented experiments to prove this. Quite the contrary, in fact.
You can find it here: arxiv.org...
I have not read the paper yet myself, but will do that. I am not sure what to make of it yet though, it is a bit hard to grasp is it is all true what they say. Things like creating time travel paradoxes and FTL communication.
But what if the choice to "erase" the information is in fact delayed, until after the target phase?
Kim, et al., have shown that it is possible to delay the choice to "erase" the quantum information until after the photon has actually hit its target.
Under those conditions an interference pattern can be recovered, even if the information is erased after the photons have hit the detector.
Originally posted by badw0lf
Well, we know it cannot be all three because empirical evidence shows us that this outcome is not within the realms of any possibility to occur in nature.
Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by Korg Trinity
Thanks for your contribution to this thread, not understanding everything about Quantum Physics but one step at time.