|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,476 Year: 3,733/9,624 Month: 604/974 Week: 217/276 Day: 57/34 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: the underlying assumptions rig the debate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I have been unable to find that quote from Wheeler, but rather only places that quote Paul Davies wrote in his 1987 book Other Worlds claiming that Wheeler said that. The actual links I have found seem to believe that the quote is incorrect or exagerated and totally outlandish.
1.07 But this uncontentious portrayal of the wave function (Heisenberg's "probability function"), as it was passed from one commentator to another, became more and more sensational and outlandish. Paul Davies is one of the more rational writers on scientific topics, and yet he could write in 1987, from Quantum Mechanics. Do you have a link to something that shows that Wheeler actually said that? I can find lots of links, mostly from crackpot sites, that quote Davies but where is there one actually quoting Wheeler? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5871 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
It's a long paper. Read half of it, but may need to wait to finish it. I do think careful consideration of this area is warranted and agree with some things you are saying. I think it is a profound point irrespective of how well I have personally presented it. I tried to bring several points into play and was attempting to make it an evangelical piece. It need not be... Sorry about the length, but I encourage you to work through it at your convenience. http://EvC Forum: What are you? EvC poll -->EvC Forum: What are you? EvC poll And that is only half the story... There are some other things in the quantum that I sense lend credence to the plausibility of the miracles spoke of in Biblical scripture. Now this is well out of my league to speak of, but I am suprised at the typical resistance to all of the ideas in question. If true (and I think so) it would be true divine revelation and the best news in the world. I guess most people are looking to prove the status quo, and not so much of the truth. By the way... the truth whatever it turns out to be would be utterly astonishing! I say that in light of the fact that so many pretend not to know more than they do, and assume such reality to be out of our reach. In that sense, they're underlying assumptions rig the debate... Thank you for your response... Edited by Rob, : No reason given. Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
QM does show that miracles are within the realm of physical possibilities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
I've read an interview of Wheeler where he essentially says the same thing but with different words. I will see if I can find it, but the quote is consistent with his stated opinions.
According to quantum theory, measurements can influence what happens. ... Stronger than the anthropic principle is what I might call the participatory principle. According to it we could not even imagine a universe that did not somewhere and for some stretch of time contain observers because the very building materials of the universe are these acts of observer-participancy. You wouldn't have the stuff out of which to build the universe otherwise. This participatory principle takes for its foundation the absolutely central point of the quantum: No elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed (or registered) phenomenon. Cosmic Search Vol. 1, No. 4 - FORUM: John A. Wheeler I think it's pretty clear what Wheeler believes. He thinks acts of observer participancy create the universe as we know it. I am not so sure he isn't overstating things, but they are the logical conclusion of quantum experiments. Acts of observation in the present do appear to have a determinative effect or at least to coorelate to the formation of the past in some instances (Wheeler perhaps suggests all instances). Edited by randman, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Rob, I wouldn't say I agree with all of it, but the basic discovery of quantum physics, if true, that somehow our questions do play a role in the answers given by even the physical universe fits very well with things Jesus taught. Take heed how you hear, for example, or consider the teachings on faith and on how an inward position within the believer can manifest a real world change outwardly.
I think QM begins to delve into what were formerly known as spiritual principles, and that the Bible teaches spiritual principles are woven into the fabric of material reality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
At the Cologne symposium [21] Mittelstaedt reviewed the arguments that had been put forward in recent years in order to show that non-local effects in quantum systems with EPR-like correlations can not be used for superluminal communications. He demonstrated that most of these arguments are based on circular proofs. For instance, a “locality principle” can not be used to exclude superluminal quantum signals and to justify quantum causality, since the locality principle itself is justified by either quantum causality or an equivalent “covariance postulate” [32]. In a similar vein, van Enk shows that the proof given by Westmoreland and Schumacher in [33] that superluminal signaling violates the quantum no-cloning theorem is in fact incorrect [34]. Hegerfeld uses the formalism of relativistic quantum mechanics to show that the wave function of a free particle initially in a finite volume instantaneously spreads to infinity and, more importantly, that transition probabilities in widely separated systems may also become nonzero instantaneously [35]. His results hold under amazingly few assumptions (Hilbert spaceframework and positivity of the energy). Hegerfeld observes that, in order to retain Einstein causality, a mechanism such as “clouds of virtual particles or vacuum fluctuations” would be needed. http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cpr/pres/107480_.pdf Contrary to some claims here, there are plenty of scientists that think meaningful transfer of information instantly and thus from our vantage point, superluminally, is entirely possible, and they are working to demonstrate that and arguably have via teleporation experiments. Edited by randman, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I'll note this quote from wheeler
Wheeler: It's inspiring to read the life of Charles Darwin and think how the division of plant and animal kingdoms, all this myriad of order, came about through the miracles of evolution, natural selection and chance mutation. To me this is a marvelous indication that you can get order by starting with disorder.
However, I didn't find anything that would support the claims you make in your OP.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Contrary to some claims here, there are plenty of scientists that think meaningful transfer of information instantly and thus from our vantage point, superluminally, is entirely possible, ...
And here is a good place to look for them:
cranks, crackpots, kooks & loons on the net
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
nwr, in typical fashion you ignore the reason for quoting Wheeler. Wheeler does speak admirably of Darwin while at the same time asserting the anthropomorphic principle and observer-participancy, which are things you assume only crackpots believe. I'll let the reader judge between your intellect and Wheeler's as far as that is concerned. The fact you fail to recognize the implications of observer-participancy speaks for itself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Hmmm....calling esteemed physicists and scientists working in the field crackpots......I could understand that if you actually providing some substantive analysis as critics of evolutionism do in their derision of evo scientists, but considering these guys' discoveries actually work their way into applied technology such as your computer chip, I think your derision is unwarranted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
randman writes:
That's false. I make no such assumption.
while at the same time asserting the anthropomorphic principle and observer-participancy, which are things you assume only crackpots believe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Hmmm....calling esteemed physicists and scientists working in the field crackpots......
Which esteemed physicists and scientists are working on superluminal transfer of information?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Superluminality is current topic of serious research such as with:
quantum tunneling and other areas
We presented the first direct time measurement confirming that the time delay in tunneling can be superluminal, studying single photons traversing a dielectric mirror [6]. Since then, several microwave experiments have confirmed that the effective group velocity of classical evanescent waves in various configurations may be superluminal [41-43]. Also, recently a femtosecond laser experiment has confirmed our earlier findings of superluminal tunneling in dielectric mirrors [44], using classical pulses.
System Unavailable
You can check out a list of superluminal papers at the Chaio group home page. Page not found | UC Berkeley Physics my prior link which you ignored that deals with this issue from the perspective of quantum teleportation.....let me add that I don't presume to understand all of he arguments, but can understand that there is an argument, and a topic of considerable research. Perhaps teleporting instantly properties or the information for part of a song (as I beleive was done for a Mozart piece) should not be considered scientifically a transfer of information, or perhaps it is merely the unwillingness to overturn an old paradigm related with GR, but from a layman's perspective, it is the same thing. You can from a human perspective transfer information superluminally. Additionally, and you probably scoff at this, but forms of extra-sensory perception are often superluminal. Ever talked with someone that felt the instant a beloved one got in trouble or died and it was confirmed later....that is certainly a subjective example, but it is something that occurs nonetheless.
A conference on superluminal velocities took place in June 1998 in Cologne [21]. Theoretical and experimental contributions to this topic focused primarily on evanescent mode propagation and on superluminal quantum phenomena. The issues of causality, superluminality, and relativity were also examined. In the area of electromagnetic propagation, two exciting developments were addressed. Nimtz reported on experimental measurements of superluminal velocities achieved with frequency band-limited signals carried by evanescent modes [22]. Specifically, he timed a microwave pulse crossing an evanescent barrier (e.g., undersized waveguides, or periodic dielectric heterostructures) at 4.7c. He demonstrated that, as consequence of the frequency band limitation of information signals, and if all mode components are evanescent, an actual signal might travel faster than the speed of light. Capelas de Oliveira and Rodrigues introduced the intriguing theory of superluminal electromagnetic X-waves (SEXW) defined as undistorted progressive waves solutions of the relativistic Maxwell equations [23]. They present simulations of finite aperture approximations to SEXW, illustrate the signaling mechanism, and discuss supporting experimental evidence. What are the key arguments put forward against the possibility of superluminal signaling? Chiao and Steinberg analyze quantum tunneling experiments and tachyon-like excitations in laser media [24]. Even though they find the evidence conclusive that the tunneling process is superluminal, and that tachyon-like excitations in a population-inverted medium at frequencies close to resonance give rise to superluminal wave packets, they argue that such phenomena can not be used for superluminal information transfer. In their view, the group velocity can not be identified as the signal velocity of special relativity, a role they attribute solely to Sommerfeld’s front velocity. In that context, Aharonov, Reznik, and Stern have shown that the unstable modes, which play an essential role in the superluminal group velocity of analytical wave packets, are strongly suppressed in the quantum limit as they become incompatible with unitary time evolution [25]. Let us now examine EPR-based superluminal schemes. Furuya et al analyze a paradigm proposed by Garuccio, in which one of the photons of a polarization-entangled EPR pair is incident upon a Michelson interferometer in which a phase-conjugation mirror (PCM) replaces one of the mirrors [26]. The sender (located at the source site) can superluminally communicate with a receiver (located at the detector site), based on the presence or absence of interferences at the detector. The scheme uses the PCM property that a reflected photon has the same polarization as the incident photon (contrary to reflection by an ordinary mirror), allowing to distinguish between circular and linear polarization. In a related context, Blaauboer et al also proposed [27] a connection between optical phase conjugation and superluminal behavior. Furuya et al prove that Garuccio’s scheme would fail if non coherent light is used, because then the interferometer could not distinguish between unpolarized photons prepared by mixing linear polarization states or by mixing circular polarization states. They admit, however, that their counterproof would not apply to a generalized Garuccio approach, which would use coherent light states. Finally, in terms of criticism, let us mention the recent article by Peres [28], where criteria that prevent superluminal signaling are established. These criteria must be obeyed by various operators involved in classical interventions on quantum systems localized in mutually spacelike regions. What are the arguments in favor of superluminal information transfer? Gisin shows [29] that Weinberg’s general framework [30] for introducing nonlinear corrections into quantum mechanics allows for arbitrary fast communications. It is interesting to note that, in a recent book [31], Weinberg himself states: “I could not find a way to extend the nonlinear version of quantum mechanics to theories based on Einstein’s special theory of relativity ( . ) both N. Gisin in Geneva and my colleague Joseph Polchinsky at the University of Texas independently pointed out that ( . ) the nonlinearities of the generalized theory could be used to send signals instantaneously over large distances”. At the Cologne symposium [21] Mittelstaedt reviewed the arguments that had been put forward in recent years in order to show that non-local effects in quantum systems with EPR-like correlations can not be used for superluminal communications. He demonstrated that most of these arguments are based on circular proofs. For instance, a “locality principle” can not be used to exclude superluminal quantum signals and to justify quantum causality, since the locality principle itself is justified by either quantum causality or an equivalent “covariance postulate” [32]. In a similar vein, van Enk shows that the proof given by Westmoreland and Schumacher in [33] that superluminal signaling violates the quantum nocloning theorem is in fact incorrect [34]. Hegerfeld uses the formalism of relativistic quantum mechanics to show that the wave function of a free particle initially in a finite volume instantaneously spreads to infinity and, more importantly, that transition probabilities in widely separated systems may also become nonzero instantaneously [35]. His results hold under amazingly few assumptions (Hilbert space framework and positivity of the energy). Hegerfeld observes that, in order to retain Einstein causality, a mechanism such as “clouds of virtual particles or vacuum fluctuations” would be needed. To conclude this review, we note a recent suggestion of Mittelstaedt [36]. If the existence of superluminal signals is assumed ab initio (viz. [22] and [35]), and consequently a new space-time metric (different from the Minkowskian metric) is adopted, all the paradoxes and difficulties discussed above would immediately disappear. http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cpr/pres/107480_.pdf comments by Anton Zeilinger
Transferring the properties of light particles over certain distances onto other light particles, with no time delay. The procedure is based on phenomena which exist only in the quantum world, and is known as "quantum teleportation."
This may be where you and I agree more than you realize. As far as I am concerned, if there is a way to instantly determine the information from another part of the galaxy or whereever, then that is superluminal from our vantage point, and so we should be able to use the properties of entanglement to eventually be able to effectively, from our vantage point, transfer information instantly. Now, whether any transfer in terms of energy or whatever has taken place is often denied, though this is still a developing area for science, and hence the next comment by Zeilinger.
Theoretically yes. The effect has so far been proved across a distance of a hundred kilometres. The amazing thing is that there can be no exchange of information between the two particles. They react absolutely in synch, although they could could never know anything of each other's existence. Note he adds later.
The spooky effect at a distance is a process outside time and space that even I can't really imagine. But I believe that quantum physics tells us something very profound about the world. And that is that the world is not the way it is independently of us. That the characteristics of the world are to a certain extent dependent on us.
Anton Zeilinger, Mathias Plüss, Regina Hügli: Spooky action and beyond (16/02/2006) - signandsight
So we really don't know how entanglement works except it does. He says it seems to involve something outside space and time, for example. Edited by randman, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4921 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Other scientists dispute Chiao's conclusions. Several European teams have been experimenting with more intense photon sources and thicker barriers. Their results indicate that the tunneling time for a particle becomes "saturated" or reaches an upper limit. If a particle can "borrow" energy, quantum mechanics does not permit it to do so indefinitely. Once the limit is reached, the particle will tunnel through the barrier in the same time, regardless of whether its thickness is two meters, two kilometers or 2,000 kilometers--if, of course, such an experiment could ever be carried out! Last year, New Scientist reported the extraordinary findings of a German research team headed by Nimtz, who was attending a conference organized in Snowbird, Utah: "Attending the meeting were some of the leading researchers in this field of faster-than-light quantum phenomena. To an astonished audience, Nimtz announced that his team in Cologne had not only measured superluminal speeds for their microwaves, but had actually sent a signal faster than light. The signal in question was Mozart's 40th Symphony.... "According to Nimtz, Mozart's 40th Symphony hopped across 12 centimeters of space at 4.7 times the speed of light. What's more, Nimtz actually had a recording to prove it. To his now bemused audience, he played a tape in which among the background hiss strains of Mozart could be heard. This was the 'signal' that had traveled faster than light." A vigorous debate ensued as to whether or not a piece of music could be considered a signal. According to Einstein, a signal traveling faster than light would effectively be traveling back in time. The ability to send information back in time would violate the scientific conceptions of cause and effect: the results of an experiment could be influenced after it had happened! Few scientists accept Nimtz's claim that a signal can be propagated faster than the speed of light. However, the experiments by Nimtz, Chiao and others point to the limitations of the existing theories of physics and add a further spur to the quest for a unified theory embracing quantum mechanics and the theory of general relativity.
Page Not Found - World Socialist Web Site I think a piece of music, by the way, is information and considering it hopped along 4.7 times faster than the speed of light, it's just a matter of time before people start revising their view of what is possible in this area. more links
In Italy, another group of physicists has also succeeded in breaking the light speed barrier. In a recently published paper, physicists at the Italian National Research Council described how they propagated microwaves at 25% above normal light speed. The group also speculates that it could prove possible to transmit information faster than light.
Page not found | Santiago Edited by randman, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I have already explicitly stated that according to your sources if the path information is knowable the superposition is collapsed. Thus the photon is forced to follow a single path. So your two questions are not about points under dispute. Your view requires that a path a photon takes can be changed, retroactively, even when the path information is knowable. That is contrary to what your sources claim.
quote:You need a more general case. If the state is knowbale then a superposition of states cannot exist. Which is a big problem for your ideas. quote: No, according to your sources it is enough that the answer is knowable. Asking the question isn't necessary.
quote:However, as I have pointed out it does not occur in a way that changes one collapsed state directly to another. As I keep having to repeat the only change available is the change from a superposition of states to a single state, a changee that can only be reversed by erasing the information that would allow us to know the collapsed state . That is not what your argument requires. You need a change from a collapsed state to a different collapsed state, and you've got no sign of anything like a quantum eraser that could affect an entire planet. quote:Which your sources seem to agree with - hence the need for quantum erasers. quote: No, I am not ignroing that issue. I make explicit reference to what quantum erasers do. You can get a different result only if you eliminate the information that would let you know the first result. That is what is "erased".
quote: Uhfortunately for you that isn't all you were saying. You were claiming that the past is completely fluid. Your own sources explicitly refer to limits which are extremely problematic for your view. Quantum erasers - or rather the need for them - are a big problem for you. So is the idea that the knowability of a photon's path - rather than actual observation - produces a collapse. Both of these make the past more difficult to change - in ways that cause great problems for the idea expressed in your OP.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024