Science: From early childhood we know that to interact with an object, we have either to go to it or to throw something at it. Yet, contrary to all our daily experience, there are spatially separated quantum systems that exhibit nonlocal correlations. Exploring how nature performs its trick of quantum nonlocality has led to new experiments that provide a deeper understanding of the tension between quantum physics and relativity and to proposals for disruptive technologies.
Quantum nonlocality: How does nature do it?
Categories:
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blogs.physicstoday.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4279
Search
Categories
- Acoustics (20)
- Arms control and military physics (167)
- Astronomy and cosmology (890)
- Atomic physics (12)
- Biography and personalities (34)
- Biological physics (155)
- Business and industry (298)
- Careers and employment (5)
- Chemical physics and molecular physics (85)
- Classical mechanics and electromagnetism (2)
- Commentary and opinion (101)
- Computational physics (92)
- Condensed matter (119)
- Crystallography (1)
- Culture and entertainment (8)
- Earth sciences (25)
- Education (287)
- Energy policy and R&D (456)
- Engineering and technology (705)
- Environment and climate change (720)
- Everyday Physics (414)
- Facilities and laboratories (210)
- Fluids and rheology (4)
- Government agencies (289)
- History, sociology, and philosophy (52)
- Instrumentation (4)
- Materials science (78)
- Medical physics (98)
- Metrology and fundamental constants (1)
- Microscopy
- Nanoscale science and technology (106)
- Nonlinear science and emergent phenomena
- Nuclear and particle physics (21)
- Optics and photonics (12)
- Planetary and space science (529)
- Plasma physics (2)
- Publishing (4)
- Quantum physics and information (102)
- Science and society (715)
- Science policy and politics (803)
- Scientific societies and awards (4)
- Semiconductors and electronics
- Statistical physics and thermodynamics
- Theoretical physics (1)
Monthly Archives
- November 2011 (13)
- October 2011 (63)
- September 2011 (66)
- August 2011 (70)
- July 2011 (56)
- June 2011 (69)
- May 2011 (84)
- April 2011 (84)
- March 2011 (93)
- February 2011 (76)
- January 2011 (78)
- December 2010 (72)
- November 2010 (77)
- October 2010 (82)
- September 2010 (72)
- August 2010 (88)
- July 2010 (83)
- June 2010 (89)
- May 2010 (81)
- April 2010 (87)
- March 2010 (89)
- February 2010 (74)
- January 2010 (74)
- December 2009 (83)
- November 2009 (81)
- October 2009 (79)
- September 2009 (82)
- August 2009 (88)
- July 2009 (86)
- June 2009 (91)
- May 2009 (81)
- April 2009 (98)
- March 2009 (97)
- February 2009 (80)
- January 2009 (64)
- December 2008 (68)
- November 2008 (65)
- October 2008 (93)
- September 2008 (98)
- August 2008 (110)
- July 2008 (97)
- June 2008 (117)
- May 2008 (122)
- April 2008 (103)
- March 2008 (106)
- February 2008 (87)
- January 2008 (94)
- December 2007 (82)
- November 2007 (96)
- October 2007 (98)
- September 2007 (93)
- August 2007 (98)
- July 2007 (91)
- June 2007 (83)
- May 2007 (89)
- April 2007 (87)
- March 2007 (88)
- February 2007 (81)
- January 2007 (89)
- December 2006 (80)
- November 2006 (80)
- October 2006 (89)
- September 2006 (80)
- August 2006 (92)
- July 2006 (76)
- June 2006 (91)
- May 2006 (83)
- April 2006 (60)
I am not a PhD nor a post doctoral quantum mechanicist but it occured to me that perhaps what is observed as quantum entanglement and/or other forms of non-locality might simply be the effects or manifestations of some form of absolute internal clocks that some how unlock the manner in which the wavefunction collapse of an entangled particle occurs when the particle is observed or forced to undergo a wave function collapse to manifest in say a measurement of a spin up or spin down state for a massive fermion or massive bosom, or for a photon, a left or right circularly polarization, a left or right elliptically polarization, or a vertical or horizontal polasrization state and the like?
Quantum theory gives (some) excellent predictions, but also suffers from intense self-referentiality. That is, if you accept a test that uses e.g. Bell’s Inequality you have to accept many of the premises that the experiment is supposed to validate.
The Science comment paper presumes the mixing of quantum observables, that mixed values can be entanged and and thus from the Bell’s statistics non-locality follows. However, it follows from two separate (also common, usual) assumptions.
How do you test for mixed states? It is really difficult to find and experiment that is not self-referential. Without ab initio assumptions, how do you show that this or that event was the consequence of the agent being in superimposed states until forced to show its hand? BY contrast, why do so many instances of “mixed” systems that are filered without renormalisation - linearly polarised light, for example - behave in so obdurately classical a manner? Twist you TV antenna through 90 degrees and you get no signal. Not: a lesser signal. None. And so on.
The best explanation of nonlocality I have found is here. The author argues that the photon is an entity just as the electron is an entity and if we follow the consequences of that parallel we arrive at some new insights. An original approach you won’t find in academia…