Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
In a landmark study, scientists at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands reported that they had conducted an experiment that they say proved one of the most fundamental claims of quantum theory — that objects separated by great distance can instantaneously affect each other’s behavior.
The finding is another blow to one of the bedrock principles of standard physics known as “locality,” which states that an object is directly influenced only by its immediate surroundings. The Delft study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, lends further credence to an idea that Einstein famously rejected. He said quantum theory necessitated “spooky action at a distance,” and he refused to accept the notion that the universe could behave in such a strange and apparently random fashion.
In particular, Einstein derided the idea that separate particles could be “entangled” so completely that measuring one particle would instantaneously influence the other, regardless of the distance separating them.
Einstein was deeply unhappy with the uncertainty introduced by quantum theory and described its implications as akin to God’s playing dice.
But since the 1970s, a series of precise experiments by physicists are increasingly erasing doubt — alternative explanations that are referred to as loopholes — that two previously entangled particles, even if separated by the width of the universe, could instantly interact.
The new experiment, conducted by a group led by Ronald Hanson, a physicist at the Dutch university’s Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, and joined by scientists from Spain and England, is the strongest evidence yet to support the most fundamental claims of the theory of quantum mechanics about the existence of an odd world formed by a fabric of subatomic particles, where matter does not take form until it is observed and time runs backward as well as forward.
The researchers describe their experiment as a “loophole-free Bell test” in a reference to an experiment proposed in 1964 by the physicist John Stewart Bell as a way of proving that “spooky action at a distance” is real.
“These tests have been done since the late ’70s but always in the way that additional assumptions were needed,” Dr. Hanson said. “Now we have confirmed that there is spooky action at distance.”
According to the scientists, they have now ruled out all possible so-called hidden variables that would offer explanations of long-distance entanglement based on the laws of classical physics.
The Delft researchers were able to entangle two electrons separated by a distance of 1.3 kilometers, slightly less than a mile, and then share information between them. Physicists use the term “entanglement” to refer to pairs of particles that are generated in such a way that they cannot be described independently. The scientists placed two diamonds on opposite sides of the Delft University campus, 1.3 kilometers apart.
Each diamond contained a tiny trap for single electrons, which have a magnetic property called a “spin.” Pulses of microwave and laser energy are then used to entangle and measure the “spin” of the electrons.
The distance — with detectors set on opposite sides of the campus — ensured that information could not be exchanged by conventional means within the time it takes to do the measurement.
“I think this is a beautiful and ingenious experiment and it will help to push the entire field forward,” said David Kaiser, a physicist at M.I.T., who was not involved in the study. However, Dr. Kaiser, who is with another group of physicists who are preparing to perform an even more ambitious experiment next year that will soon measure light captured at the far edges of the universe, also said he did not think every scintilla of doubt had been erased by the Dutch experiment.
The tests take place in a mind-bending and peculiar world. According to quantum mechanics, particles do not take on formal properties until they are measured or observed in some way. Until then, they can exist simultaneously in two or more places. Once measured, however, they snap into a more classical reality, existing in only one place.
Beyond the immediate result, physicists noted that the experiment represented an advance in the understanding of a Lilliputian world that was once largely the province of theory. Quantum mechanics has already had a huge impact on modern technology and industry. For example, it is the foundation for modern computers and lasers.
“What I do find interesting is that the experimenters are learning how to manipulate quantum systems, and do experiments that are far beyond what was possible when I was starting in physics,” said Leonard Susskind, a theoretical physicist at Stanford. “Things which were at best ‘thought experiments’ become possible, then routine. That is incredibly impressive.”
Indeed, the experiment is not merely a vindication for the exotic theory of quantum mechanics, it is a step toward a practical application known as a “quantum Internet.” Currently, the security of the Internet and the electronic commerce infrastructure is fraying in the face of powerful computers that pose a challenge to encryption technologies based on the ability to factor large numbers and other related strategies.
Researchers like Dr. Hanson envision a quantum communications network formed from a chain of entangled particles girdling the entire globe. Such a network would make it possible to securely share encryption keys, and know of eavesdropping attempts with absolute certainty.
For some physicists, even though the new experiment claims to be “loophole free,” the matter is not completely closed.
“The experiment has closed two of the three major loopholes beautifully, but two out of three isn’t three,” Dr. Kaiser said. “I believe in my bones that quantum mechanics is the correct description of nature. But to make the strongest statement, frankly we’re not there.”
A potential weakness of the experiment, he suggested, is that an electronic system the researchers used to add randomness to their measurement may in fact be predetermined in some subtle way that is not easily detectable, meaning that the outcome might still be predetermined as Einstein believed.
To attempt to overcome this weakness and close what they believe is a final loophole, the National Science Foundation has financed a group of physicists led by Dr. Kaiser and Alan H. Guth, also at M.I.T., to attempt an experiment that will have a better chance of ensuring the complete independence of the measurement detectors by gathering light from distant objects on different sides of the galaxy next year, and then going a step further by capturing the light from objects known as quasars near the edge of the universe in 2017 and 2018.
Ow. Quantum and meta physics make my head hurt.
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
I didnt understand hardly any of that, and wonder if I ever can.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Orlanth wrote: I didnt understand hardly any of that, and wonder if I ever can.
Its quantum mechanics. Its not mean tto be understood
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
Not really. A lot of our understanding of the physics of the macro-world we inhabit and interact with on a daily basis will remain unchanged.
One of the first things one has to understand about the quantum-world is that things behave very differently there than they do in our macro-world.
While our macro-world is built upon the quantum-world, the rules of the quantum-world doesn't always manifest (or even translate meaningfully) to our macro-world.
Also..what Tactical_Spam said.
It is only when you are well and truly confused by quantum-mechanics, that you are moving towards understanding it.
....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 20:05:31
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
Not really. A lot of our understanding of the physics of the macro-world we inhabit and interact with on a daily basis will remain unchanged.
One of the first things one has to understand about the quantum-world is that things behave very differently there than they do in our macro-world. While our macro-world is built upon the quantum-world, the rules of the quantum-world doesn't always manifest (or even translate meaningfully) to our macro-world.
Also..what Tactical_Spam said. It is only when you are well and truly confused by quantum-mechanics, that you are moving towards understanding it. ....
How can there be seperate macro and quantum worlds? There is only one world right?
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
Not really. A lot of our understanding of the physics of the macro-world we inhabit and interact with on a daily basis will remain unchanged.
One of the first things one has to understand about the quantum-world is that things behave very differently there than they do in our macro-world.
While our macro-world is built upon the quantum-world, the rules of the quantum-world doesn't always manifest (or even translate meaningfully) to our macro-world.
Also..what Tactical_Spam said.
It is only when you are well and truly confused by quantum-mechanics, that you are moving towards understanding it.
....
How can there be seperate macro and quantum worlds? There is only one world right?
Basically there's physics that applies at the tiny particle level, and physics that applies to the larger world we know.
...says the liberal arts major, but I think that's the general idea IIRC.
Most of Einstein's work operates in the macroscopic level where, by and large, he is correct. Einstein also believed that such things could also apply at the Quantum level, and did not like the amount of uncertainty and unexplainability of things like this.
This is more like discovering there is more to gravity than "things go down" than re-doing our understanding of physics.
Similarly, Newton's laws are all technically incorrect. Force doesn't actually equal force times acceleration. However, under "normal" circumstances, Newton's laws are accurate enough to send humans to the moon, so they're effectively correct and still get used.
I am the Hammer. I am the right hand of my Emperor. I am the tip of His spear, I am the gauntlet about His fist. I am the woes of daemonkind. I am the Hammer.
I bet there was alot of similar initial reaction when Einstein showed that gravity isn't best thought of as a force so much as the warping of spacetime by objects pushing through it, or that matter and energy are equivalent.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/22 20:33:25
I am looking at this conversation... and nothing makes sense. Quantum mechanics looks like a bunch of stuff that is highly theoretical and nigh impossible to prove without some gakky method.
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
Tactical_Spam wrote: I am looking at this conversation... and nothing makes sense. Quantum mechanics looks like a bunch of stuff that is highly theoretical and nigh impossible to prove without some gakky method.
Define gakky method?
A lot of it is:
>isolate particle
>zap it with stuff
>watch what happens
Ow. Quantum and meta physics make my head hurt.
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
Now get working on that FTL drive!
As a Physics doctorate friend once told me:
"If you can understand Quantum physics, you didn't study it right."
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
Well it aren't really two seperate worlds, its like how your skin looks like one solid piece and yet it is actually tons of cells, Or how a block of wood looks solid, but it is mostly empty space. The way we perceive things and the reality of things are not one and the same unfortunately
Basically, Einstein thought the interaction didn't work the way the Quantum Physics people said it did, but they never got it really hashed out in any sort of experimental test during his lifetime.
The "spooky action at a distance" theory has been experimental verified for years in favor of the Quantum Mechanics people.
This does not however render Einstein's models invalid, General and Special relativity aren't broken by this.
While yes "spooky action ad a distance" does allow things to essentially effect something instantaneously no matter how distance, the causality limit of the universe ("c") isn't broken as you need both sides to really know what's going on, and thus can't break the causality limit.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
I'm going to simply point out that OF COURSE the rules of quantum physics do not apply at the scale of astrophysics. Einstein never claimed that they did, and Stephen Hawking has basically devoted his life to "unifying" the two theories.
Something about this article strikes me as "off"....and its been known for a long time that particles can effect other particles not in their immediate local. Again, that is quantum as opposed to astro scale physics. See what I'm saying?
It's been theorized and accomplished in experiments, but never proven beyond all doubt that quantum entanglement exists. This report is just highlighting the fact that we're nearly there in terms of fully proving it.
So if I understand everything correctly, if this is proven, our traditional model of physics is incorrect?
Not really. A lot of our understanding of the physics of the macro-world we inhabit and interact with on a daily basis will remain unchanged.
One of the first things one has to understand about the quantum-world is that things behave very differently there than they do in our macro-world.
While our macro-world is built upon the quantum-world, the rules of the quantum-world doesn't always manifest (or even translate meaningfully) to our macro-world.
Also..what Tactical_Spam said.
It is only when you are well and truly confused by quantum-mechanics, that you are moving towards understanding it.
....
How can there be seperate macro and quantum worlds? There is only one world right?
Its a matter of scale.
Astro = large IE planetary systems, stellar bodies, etc.
Quantum = small IE subatomic particles.
Gravity and strong/weak nuclear bonds are what "glue" everything together.
Electromagnetism (light, UV rays, gamma rays, "energy") is sort of how the universe "expresses" the interactions of stellar bodies and particles.
The laws of astrophysics are not applicable to quantum scale, and vice versa. The point at which these two worlds become differentiated is "fuzzy", and unifying the two theories is kind of the holy grail of physics writ large.
Hawking's "Black Holes & Baby Universes" is a quick and easy read if you want to learn the basics.
I think it is appropriate to leave this here.
These are all professors and researchers at the University of Nottingham. The video is from the excellent channel Sixty Symbols.
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
This kind of quantum entanglement has been thought about for a long time, and often comes up in discussions about FTL. Its doesn't really make any difference to Einstein's theories, because no information can be sent or received.
The topic title is misleading. It insinuates that one of Einstein's theories has been shown to be wrong. When in fact all it really says is that the man himself might have been wrong sometimes, which I don't think was ever disputed. I'm sure he was wrong about a great many things, but that isn't what he's famous for.
I don't think of Einstein as being "wrong", but rather that his understanding was incomplete. Just like Newton and Darwin and Hawking and.....
We keep increasing our knowledge, and the work done by these giants have been indispensable.
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
So I have a question maybe someone can answer;
Does this interaction happening in or out of space-time? Is it truly instant or is it happening only at or near lightspeed?
My understanding is that a component of Quantum Physics is the rejection of the idea that time is a forward flowing thing. Quantum Physics posits that Time flows forwards and backwards at the same time, i.e. from a quantum perspective, everything happens at the same time. Everything.
Also a bit of clarity on Einstein's view as I understand it to be. He simply didn't want to believe that such a diviation to he model of the universe were possible. Having things that are far beyond physical interaction being able to interact with each-other truly is bizarre. " I can't touch you, see you, or speak to you, But I can still comunicate with you, and ask you hows the weather, and you can tell me how the weather is without ever sending anything to me through space, no light, no sound waves, no physically objects," Yea thats dam freaky, But I am over the moon, because If it is instantaneous, It means interstellar empires are possible =D
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LordofHats wrote: My understanding is that a component of Quantum Physics is the rejection of the idea that time is a forward flowing thing. Quantum Physics posits that Time flows forwards and backwards at the same time, i.e. from a quantum perspective, everything happens at the same time. Everything.
I know it all happens "simultaneously" at the quantum level, but all things leave basically an imprint on time, This imprint is what we perceive as time and we perceive it at a specific angel. Do the question is is this action at a distance complete disregarding that "angular imprint" and being imprint on time "without any slant" ala it is expressed simultaneously even to us?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/23 04:24:25
Time is the rate of change of everything, not something you can leave an imprint on. Maths any physics operate perfectly well if time is going backwards or forwards. Instant communication is just communication without a rate of change.
Selym wrote: Time is the rate of change of everything, not something you can leave an imprint on. Maths any physics operate perfectly well if time is going backwards or forwards. Instant communication is just communication without a rate of change.
Nope. Rate of change is something completely different. E.g. If you crash your car do you gain or lose time? no, you undergo a rate of change (in that example a rate of change in velocity, which is a rate of change in distance), a differential with respect to time. If time were a rate of change you would be able to go back and forward in it as you can accelerate or decelerate in a motor vehicle.
The reason you can't go back in time is often said to involve the 2nd law of thermodynamics and also by general ( I can never remember which is which) relativity that for anything with mass to travel at or above the speed of light requires infinite energy, I'm not a physicist so I can't give you more than philosophical answers to what time is.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/23 08:09:29
Selym wrote: Time is the rate of change of everything, not something you can leave an imprint on. Maths any physics operate perfectly well if time is going backwards or forwards. Instant communication is just communication without a rate of change.
Nope. Rate of change is something completely different. E.g. If you crash your car do you gain or lose time? no, you undergo a rate of change (in that example a rate of change in velocity, which is a rate of change in distance), a differential with respect to time. If time were a rate of change you would be able to go back and forward in it as you can accelerate or decelerate in a motor vehicle.
The reason you can't go back in time is often said to involve the 2nd law of thermodynamics and also by general ( I can never remember which is which) relativity that for anything with mass to travel at or above the speed of light requires infinite energy, I'm not a physicist so I can't give you more than philosophical answers to what time is.
as far as we can prove, time is not an actual thing. There is a rate of change due to cause and effect. That is time moving forwards. Going against that would be getting the effect first, then moving to the cause. That would be going backwards in "time".
bag!"
18.000 
8.200 
3.300 
2.400 
3.100 
5.500 
2.500 
3.000
The Undying Spawn of Shub-Niggurath 
