Re: Why it is impossible to reverse temporal ordering in superluminal information transfer.

From: bernard.chaverondier (bernard.chaverondier_at_wanadoo.fr)
Date: 11/02/04 

Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:32:08 +0100

"RP" <no_mail_no_spam@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:2uo2foF2cct0tU1@uni-berlin.de...

Chaverondier
> > I sketched a thought experiment to provide a more detailed
> > presentation about the issue of quantum measurement determinacy
> > experimental testing on the links http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lebigbang
> > and http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lebigbang/epr.htm

RP
> Your English is difficult to follow, but I believe that I've understood
> it well enough, and it seems to correspond to my own conclusions. Just
> to check: Would you say that your view is more or less equivalent to the
> collapse of the wave function being, what amounts to, the emission of a
> negative photon with instantaneous propagational speed?

Chaverondier
I don't understand what you want to say here.

RP
> OTOH, I haven't seen yet where this provides faster than c
> information transfer in the forward time direction.

Chaverondier
The idea is that one. I assume that quantum measurement indeterminacy
be only an apparent indeterminacy stemming from the lack of knowledge
of the quantum state of the measuring apparatus and the environment
interacting with it (ie a deterministic contextual hidden variable
interpretation of quantum indeterminacy instead of a a
fundamental indeterminacy)

Now, the idea is that one.

* Let us assume for instance that the outcome of the measurement
of the polarization of 45° polarized photons by a 0° polarizer (for
instance by a crystal calcite blade) be actually uniquely determined by the
quantum state of the polarizer and the quantum state of its environment.

  * let us assume that we are up to exert a drastic
control on a sufficient part of these assumed causes of
the hazardous 0° or 90° polarization outcomes, thanks to

        * a high laboratory vacuum
        * a very low temperature
        * a high protection against electromagnetic
            radiations thanks to an electromagnetic shield
        * a refined insulation against mechanical vibrations
        * a very neat and very tiny crystal blade
        * a vanishing gravity field ?
        * an interacting environment in a Bose Einstein Condensate so as
to control the quantum state of the environment of the calcite blade ?...

  * let us assume (in the framework of this thought experiment)
that, thanks to a high polarization measurement frequency,
we are up to measure two successive photons polarization
before the causes (of the apparent randomness of the 0° or 90°
polarization outcomes) have enough changed between these two
successive polarization measurements.

In such a case, we should observe that two successive
photons polarization measurement outcomes have a slightly
greater chance being identical rather than being different.

This thought experiment can be improved if an
array of periodically spaced photons hits the
array of periodically spaced polarizers which are the
nodes of the crystal blade. Indeed the test of our deterministic
contextual hidden variable interpretation of quantum apparent
hazard would be the observation of a space and/or time
correlation between successive and/or spatially close
polarization measurements of our 45° polarized photons
by our calcite blade.

As you can see, the same idea, applied in the framework of Alain
Aspect experiment (drastic control of the environment of the "local"
polarizer) would allow to send a self-correlation signal to the "far"
polarizer provided the "local" polarizer be close enough from the
generator of EPR correlated pairs of photons to be reached before
the "far" polarizer (according to Aristotle space-time objective
chronology).

Bernard Chaverondier
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lebigbang/epr.htm
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lebigbang/no_communication.htm
Quantum determinism or relativist locality ?

Relevant Pages