Re: twins versus quanta collapse


N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) ha scritto:

Dear beda pietanza:

"beda pietanza" <beda-pietanza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1174781492.834428.307320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) ha scritto:
...
Not this bothers me about QM, but the collapse of
wave function: two entangled photons where the
detection of A determine the outcome of B: this, if
really happens,

It does. It does FTL... and near as we can measure,
instantaneously.


Now we got to the point:

premise:
Along path A a string of entangled photons is detected
indipendently, we register a sequel of outcomes.
After many attempts the statistic fits the wave function
probability distribution as expected.

Along path B a string of entangled photons is detected,
many times, and this, also, fits the expected statistic.
......

the checking:

Now along path A a sequel of photons is detected
and registered; the sequel of path B, detected afterwards
some distance away, results anchored to the sequel of
photons A.

And of course viceversa: if we detect along path B we
determine the outcome of path A.

And this all the times we try.

conclusion:

Our immediate conclusion must be that the sequel of
photons A and the sequel of photons B were generated
as such from the common source.

If you say instead, that is the act of measurement on
A that determine immediately (and a posteriori) the
outcome of B, you exclude that they were prefixed from
the moment of emission, then you have to prove it.

What is the prove that the linking takes place after the
measurement and not simply (a priori) from the
common source ??????????

I apologize for the redundancy and thanks for the attention.

I wish you had read what I wrote below. Because you again make
the same mistake.

Two streams of entangled particles, sent "left" are spin up, sent
"right" are spin down.

I don't mean to correct you but myself: as far as I understand the
two
streams of particles should have the spin randomly changing.

The "left" stream is passed into a
shielded, distant device to flip the spin on the particle stream
contained within it.

flipping in this case is tantamount of measuring because doing
measuring
and flipping in a row only the first would produce the collapse
of the outcome.

Far away in the "right" stream, for no
apparent reason, and only when / if the "left" stream is flipped,
the other does too.

it comes to the same question: is the measurement (with or without
the subsequent flipping) on one the path that makes the change on the
other or all was set from the start at generation of the entangled
couples at the source ????

I resume these statements:

a)Entanglement is the correlation between two particles/photons
generated from a single event by a single source.

b)The collapse of the wave funtion is the outcome of a measurement
done on a single particle/photon that fixes, from a range of possible
outcomes, just the one obtained.

c)The collapse of the wave function a) is istantly transferred to the
other
particle/photon.

Please correct, comment or integrate

thanks again

beda pietanza


best regards

beda pietanza

ps. on the spacetime not rilevant we can discuss after we
settle the above question.

It is very relevant, since you assume "separation", "difference",
and "isolation" when there *is* none for quantum effects.

then there must be a hidden cause that links the
two since the generation of the two entangled
photons, the detection of one of the two should not
have effect on the other aside to show how the
entanglement has fixed the two from the begin.

I would submit the "hidden cause" is our forgetting the wave
nature of all quantum objects. Because we assume we have
"separated" the two objects, this bizarre behavior springs up.
Spacetime is only a problem for macroscopic systems... quantum
objects don't care for / about spacetime. "Separation" is
just
us measuring ourselves again, beda.

David A. Smith

David A. Smith

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: I dont understand EPR
    ... which says that paired photons ... thing (lambda) that determines the results in individual ... polarization of the photons incident on the polarizers ... rates of coincidental detection, ie., that lambda is ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 754 November 16, 2005 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein
    ... > The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News ... Entanglement is the quantum ... Take the case of two photons ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: ISO 200000 ?
    ... You challenged my 10 photons and said try it with less. ... I was thinking total photons, however you got there, whether you get that from one frame averaging individual pixels, or from averaging multiple frames. ... not understood from what you have written, how many total photons you would consider a detection. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Entanglement breaks new record
    ... Physicists have succeeded in entangling five photons for the first time. ... exploit the laws of quantum mechanics in quantum information processing. ... By taking advantage of quantum phenomena such as entanglement, ... Belle Dumé is Science Writer at PhysicsWeb ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Entanglement breaks new record
    ... > Physicists have succeeded in entangling five photons for the first time. ... > exploit the laws of quantum mechanics in quantum information processing. ... > By taking advantage of quantum phenomena such as entanglement, ... Posted here last month Physics News Update ...
    (sci.physics)