| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Spooky Action At A Distance Proven - Red Letter Day For Physics |
| 2008-08-15 |
| Physicists at the University of Geneva achieved the weird result by creating a pair of ‘entangled’ photons, separating them, then sending them down a fibre optic cable to the Swiss villages of Satigny and Jussy, some 18 kilometres apart. The researchers found that when each photon reached its destination, it could instantly sense its twin’s behaviour without any direct communication. The finding does not violate the laws of quantum mechanics, the theory that physicists use to describe the behaviour of very small systems. Rather, it shows just how quantum mechanics can defy everyday expectation, says Nicolas Gisin, the researcher who led the study. “Our experiment just puts the finger where it hurts,” he says. The study is published in Nature. But the new experiment shows that direct communication between the photons (at least as we know it) is simply impossible. The team simultaneously measured several properties of both photons, such as phase, when they arrived at their villages and found that they did indeed have a spooky awareness of each other’s behaviour. On the basis of their measurements, the team concluded that if the photons had communicated, they must have done so at least 100,000 times faster than the speed of light — something nearly all physicists thought would be impossible. In other words, these photons cannot know about each other through any sort of normal exchange of information. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #45 From the point of view of the photons, everything happens at once. As far as the experiment goes, this isn't new, just a further refinement. The lesson: it's a small world, after all. Spike Uniter: reference, please. |
| Posted by: KBK 2008-08-15 23:59 |
| #44 #30 Not published, yet. Testing comes first. It is already published, but of course testing will come first. Later. |
| Posted by: trailing daughter #1 2008-08-15 23:11 |
| #43 In a strict sense, time is not. ;-) Which clearly explains why I always seem to arrive late, even when I don't get lost along the way. Thanks, Spike Uniter! Ptah, trailing daughter #1 introduced me to Flatland. Heinlein wrote about the twins effect in one of his juveniles. Although in his story it was real twins, communicating telepathically, one remaining on Earth while the other joined a team exploring the near bits of the galaxy. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-08-15 22:59 |
| #42 Phil_b, what about X-rays, cosmic rays, microwaves, and radio waves? These are not perceptible, yet we have instrumentation that detects them and maps them to perceptibility. My point is that material objects, including human sense organs and scientific instrumentation that broadens and extends our sense organs, may be of limited use in detecting objects of higher dimension if they are limited to three dimensions. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2008-08-15 22:27 |
| #41 WAFF.com > US OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH BEGINS STUDY OF LASER [super]COMMUNICATIONS; + THE FUTURE ARRIVES EARLY {Planned Continuing expansion of USAF Raptor/Predator UAV FLeet + MilOps]. 300 ea. since 2007 > MORE PER-UNIT NEW + IMPROVED WAR CAPABIL-MISSIONS, + MILYUHNS AND ZILYUHNS OF 'EM??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-08-15 21:34 |
| #40 proton strings I think they are no longer available, if they ever were. Or do you mean strings of protons? If you don't mind some extra neutrons and electrons, use nylon thread as a good substitute. It's cheaper than nanotubes. ;-) and dark matter DarkWing Duck may be as helpful. Both are from Mythospace. ;-) |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 19:30 |
| #39 Well guys that is all fine and good and we all know Albert was a genius HOWEVER, is there anyway to retrofit an infinity probability drive to my Interdimensional Transport Unit? Or if that is not an option, I did hear that there is some weird stuff going on with proton strings and dark matter that could help me out. I am actually trying to go back in time to see if I can get some $0.35 per gallon gas for my politically incorrect SUV. |
| Posted by: James Carville 2008-08-15 18:52 |
| #38 Pebbles, time is not a dimension, let alone a small circular thingie. It is a property of projection from a higher dimension into a lower dimension. In a strict sense, time is not. ;-) |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 18:17 |
| #37 ptah, I'm pretty sure that Minkowski space implies 4 dimensions. I personally believe that there IS a "time dimension" (polarisation space), it's just extremely small and circular. This dimension allows the universe to recurse/self interact/square and produce the universe state for T+1. All objects in the universe move at ct, it's just that non-light objects can rotate into the time dimension in order to "slow down". The sub light particles perceived time is based on the crossing of the light line, i.e. faster particles run slower. With this formulation you basically get Einsteinian space-time with less tricks. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2008-08-15 16:08 |
| #36 Ptah, my 2c worth as a geneticist. Causal relationships have selective value, ie if you know what a causal relationship is and can exploit it then your odds increase in the natural selection 'lottery'. So there may (or may not) be non-causal relationships, but because they have no evolutionary value, we are oblivious to them. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2008-08-15 16:05 |
| #35 Thanks CF. Now that that is cleared up i think i will head off to the hills to Cascade Days. commune with nature and swill mass quantites of fermented beverages. |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2008-08-15 15:52 |
| #34 sigh. I continue to be amazed that people continue to belive that time is a dimension. It is NOT: a true dimension is navigable and has units of length. Going from 3 to 4 dimensions is EXACTLY the same as going from 1 to 2 and 2 to 3: go "perpendicular" to all existing dimensions. This has been known for decades. Sheesh, has Abbot's "Flatland" been put on The Index and banned, with all copies burned? The confusion of time with the fourth dimension is due to misinterpretation of one of Einstein's arguments that two events seen as simultaneous in one frame of reference will not be seen as simultaneous in another. In showing this, he set noted that information of an event has to be carried by "light" (electromagnetic waves at some frequency). The light carrying the information of the event would travel away from the origin in a sphere. the "event" would be recorded only when the "wavefront" of that sphere struck an observer. however, because light travels at a certain speed, the 'event" would be observed some time after the event happened. That, in turn, is related to the distance from the event that the observer is at. Einstein set up an equation that involved the Pythagorean theorem, but required translating the time of travel into distance travelled (ct). Some idiot, reading that "c" (the speed of light) is constant, proceeded to assume that "c" was dimensionless, and thus assumed T was a "dimension" since it had to have length to be factored into the distance equation. It actually is a constant velocity, so "ct" is a distance, representing the radius of the sphere 't' time units after the event if it expanded at the rate of 'c'. This result is, to me, evidence of higher dimensions. The number of dimensions is still open to question, but if one showed as much imagination as Square in "Flatland", the possiblity of more than three dimensions is obvious. The inability to "see" three dimensions is a limitation imposed by the nature of our instrumentation: every last bit of it is constructed of matter, and if matter is a strictly three dimensional entity, its limited to detecting phenomena possessing effects that only affect three dimensional entities. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2008-08-15 14:08 |
| #33 I think that is prohibited by the Union of Entangled Protons - its not in their Labor Contract, USN. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2008-08-15 13:42 |
| #32 But will it come to my house and program the VCR? P-u-l-l-ease???? |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2008-08-15 13:23 |
| #31 or when you observe photon #1, something goes backward in time and changes photon #2 |
| Posted by: mhw 2008-08-15 12:55 |
| #30 James, It didn't? I'll raise hell! Kidding. ;-) Not published, yet. Testing comes first. But don't worry, not going anywhere and when I can put it out, you'll be the first to know. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 12:17 |
| #29 Can you point me to a paper that explains your model, Spike? Your nic didn't show up on arXiv :-) |
| Posted by: James 2008-08-15 11:56 |
| #28 I think it rather obvious that time is quantised and not a linear dimension. That's why I disagree with these sort of explanations. The particles all share an initial state. There's no magic needed. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2008-08-15 11:40 |
| #27 Ed, the problem is in piggybacking some information on the participating particles. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 11:10 |
| #26 A week or two I read an article about a quantum entangled photon experiment where a signal pulse exited a fiber optic before it had entered it. In essence, it showed the future. I want to take one of those machines to a Vegas rou_lette wheel. |
| Posted by: ed 2008-08-15 11:02 |
| #25 Tachion Flux Drive is to 'yesterday'. Nowdays you need an Infinite Improbility Drive to be really cool and pick up the really hot chicks.... The Infinite Improbability Drive is a wonderful new method of crossing interstellar distances in a few seconds; without all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace. As the Improbability Drive reaches infinite improbability, it passes through every conceivable point in every conceivable universe almost simultaneously. In other words, you're never sure where you'll end up or even what species you'll be when you get there. It's therefore important to dress accordingly. The Infinite Improbability Drive was invented following research into finite improbability which was often used to break the ice at parties by making all the molecules in the hostess' undergarments leap one foot simultaneously to the left in accordance with the theory of indeterminacy. Many respectable physicists said they weren't going to stand for that sort of thing, partly because it was a debasement of science, but mostly because they didn't get invited to those sort of parties. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2008-08-15 10:59 |
| #24 TomAnon, Not to worry. Joe Mendiola will be coming along soon to make it all crystal clear. |
| Posted by: Jolutch Mussolini7800 2008-08-15 10:50 |
| #23 Does this mean that my Tachion Flux Drive Interdimensional Transport system is obsolete? |
| Posted by: James Carville 2008-08-15 10:44 |
| #22 Well as long as you don't cross the beams and have the phase inverter overloading the warp coil.... Sorry folks but this is a tad over my head. And if you think this is bad some of the comments in the article are even worse. But it does sound interesting.... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2008-08-15 10:32 |
| #21 Just tell us how it will improve cell phone reception and we'll accept it on that premise. Working on it. Actually, no.;-) It won't improve a cell phone reception. So far, it is in a mathematical model stage. But it makes quite a bit of sense and there is no real "need" to "visualize" it, although it is not impossible, by applying a reduction via analogy. There are some interesting implications that I'll be trying to get tested as/when I get some funding. Fortunately, it won't take a collider to do it. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 10:24 |
| #20 Oh my.. where is Mucky when you need some 'splaining?? |
| Posted by: TomAnon 2008-08-15 10:22 |
| #19 Could anyone locate Dr. Heisenberg for comment? |
| Posted by: Anon4021 2008-08-15 10:17 |
| #18 Guys - would you please use smaller words and speak slower? My box of crayons only has eight colors in it. You are using the box of 64. |
| Posted by: GORT 2008-08-15 09:54 |
| #17 5-d hyperspace is difficult for most physicists to visualize. Just tell us how it will improve cell phone reception and we'll accept it on that premise. Seriously though, proton interaction is much easier to generate, but when you have a couple billion $$$ in a facility, you need to have some WOW factor built into the research. Interesting work, its hard to put together the puzzle when people are still finding pieces. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-08-15 09:50 |
| #16 Humph. I thought this article was gonna be about AC-130 Gunships. |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2008-08-15 08:44 |
| #15 Hidden variables don't work, by the experiments that confirmed Bell's theorem. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2008-08-15 08:32 |
| #14 Yea, you can say that, if you bear in mind that it's a projection, a crude analogy would be seeing a reflection in a mirror. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 08:29 |
| #13 From the headline I thought this was a remote-controlled C130 Gunship. Thsi would be like saying a particle occupied two different spaces at the same time. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2008-08-15 07:36 |
| #12 The obvious symmetry suggests some interaction over space. It also implies the existence of smaller discrete units. |
| Posted by: McZoid 2008-08-15 06:23 |
| #11 I favour Hidden variables, rather than spooky action. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2008-08-15 06:14 |
| #10 If you can prove it, but not explain it, are you sure you really understand it? Or did Spike explain it, just above? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2008-08-15 06:13 |
| #9 No. Although there is an assumption that the collapse of wave function is due to the fact of observation (somehow--because empirically it looks like it), in a strict sense this is not true. It is due to the fact that we are dealing with a hyperdimensional projection and the moment we elect one aspect into focus within our 4-d matrix, we make another aspect unavailable to our perception or instruments. Simplifying here a bit, but that's the gist of it. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 05:32 |
| #8 because measure it disturbs the state? |
| Posted by: Funkymonkey 2008-08-15 04:13 |
| #7 from what I read, we know the 2 particles are the same but we can never know what that state is at any particular time if we measure it |
| Posted by: Funkymonkey 2008-08-15 04:12 |
| #6 Yeh. Wot he said.. |
| Posted by: Bunyip 2008-08-15 03:54 |
| #5 Entanglement is a default property of 5-d hyperspace. To disentangle them, you'd need 7-d hyperspace. It is not really disentanglement, but you project them going back and forth on the time line (4-d hyperspatial). You can apply a pressure for the net positive time flow (4-d causal relationship) via 9-d hyperspace. But in order to do that, you need to be in 11-d hyperspace. In fact, you can do any type of projection there, not only form causal relationships, but also violate them as you please. |
| Posted by: Spike Uniter 2008-08-15 02:07 |
| #4 Time for some "field trials". |
| Posted by: Kirk 2008-08-15 01:04 |
| #3 They are physic. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2008-08-15 00:49 |
| #2 They've been doing some really spooky research with Higgs boson particles along the same lines. I finally understood it, but I had to lose 10% of my brain capacity first. Star Trek transporters by the 22nd century. |
| Posted by: Mizzou Mafia 2008-08-15 00:33 |
| #1 Wonderful! |
| Posted by: 3dc 2008-08-15 00:21 |