Quantum Measuring Paradox

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDYKA5gl5cw&feature=related

 

This is from "How Long is a Piece of String" by Alan Davies BBC -- with a physics teacher. A very simple, clear explanation of the quantum slit paradox.... demonstrated in a lab with a laser.

Edited June 6, 2010 by drewhempel

[Marblehead]

Nope. I still don't buy it. I believe that the people who are suggesting that some thing can be in tow places at once are missing something. No, I have no idea what they are missing but there is some element, in my mind, that only makes it appear that a think is in tow places at once. Maybe harmonics, maybe defraction, I don't know.

 

That a beam of light (the wave) can be be broken into its constituent parts doesn't mean that any single part was in two places at once. It simply means that they have converted the wave into particles.

 

But what do I know?

 

Peace & Love!

[voidisyinyang]

Nope. I still don't buy it. I believe that the people who are suggesting that some thing can be in tow places at once are missing something. No, I have no idea what they are missing but there is some element, in my mind, that only makes it appear that a think is in tow places at once. Maybe harmonics, maybe defraction, I don't know.

 

That a beam of light (the wave) can be be broken into its constituent parts doesn't mean that any single part was in two places at once. It simply means that they have converted the wave into particles.

 

But what do I know?

 

Peace & Love!

 

Well if you watch the next section of that documentary they go into the new discovery of plant photosynthesis based on quantum superposition as well -- so there is an "infinite" number of paths literally taken but then the most efficient one is chosen for the actual transmission, thereby enabling 99% energy efficiency.

 

I agree that this level of efficiency is a wave that can not be measured itself -- it's the true meaning of nondualism. We exist within this infinite potential wave as a higher dimension of space.

[Z3N]

[Marblehead]

Well if you watch the next section of that documentary they go into the new discovery of plant photosynthesis based on quantum superposition as well -- so there is an "infinite" number of paths literally taken but then the most efficient one is chosen for the actual transmission, thereby enabling 99% energy efficiency.

 

I agree that this level of efficiency is a wave that can not be measured itself -- it's the true meaning of nondualism. We exist within this infinite potential wave as a higher dimension of space.

 

Ouch! You got heavy on me. Hehehe.

 

The plant example (photosynthesis) you suggested is a given, IMO. There are different times in a plant's life when the majority of the energy is directed to a particular part of the plant, sometime along only one of thousands of possible paths.

 

But that is different from saying that the same particle of energy is going to two different parts of the plant at the same time.

 

I like your last sentence. We would probably have disagreements if we were to discuss the subject though. But I still like it.

 

Reminded me of the words from a song, "I left my heart in San Francisco." No, my heart is exactly where it is supposed to be. It is my memory that keeps recalling San Francisco. A lovely town, that one.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

But when the gap of the slit is narrow than this phenomenon occurs. So why is it so?

 

Yes. That is a fair question. I don't have any possible answers. My knowledge is not great enough to tackle the question.

 

I agree that particles and waves are the same thing. When looked at over a period of space/time we see the wave. But if we look at only one point of the wave at any given point in space/time we are able to see each single particle that the wave is composed of. But we do not see the 'same' particle in two different places at the same time - we see different particles of the wave at different places at the same time.

 

I really don't think I would enjoy it very much if it were possible for me to be in two different places at the same time. I'm not good at multi-tasking and I'm sure I would screw up both of my lives.

 

Peace & Love!

[Apech]

This is basic physics. When the light creates an interference pattern (stripes) it is because it is behaving as a wave. The two slits in effect take small samples from the wave front as it hits them. The two samples becomes light sources in themselves and as waves they overlap. When they overlap in some places they cancel each other out (the dark stripes) and in other places they add together (the bright stripes). This is the same as when waves on the surface of water interact with each other and the water surface becomes 'choppy'. But in this case because the light from the two slits are in phase (because they both come from the original light bulb) they interfere in a nice ordered pattern.

 

When they start to look at light as photons then these are like individual particles. They should not produce interference patterns because separate particles are not waves so there is no adding and subtracting of peaks and troughs - in fact there is no connection between the photons which are like little bullets. But when they add the patterns produced by many photons the patterns re-emerge. So even though they can detect individual photon impacts (the dots) somehow the interactivity which waves demonstrate is preserved. This is called the paradoxical nature of light - in that is behaves both as separate particles and waves at the same time. This is an indisputable empirically verifiable fact. What is not a fact are the theories to explain how it happens.

 

In order to create interference patterns the photons have to group together - so what is the connection between photons which allows this to happen? To put it in simple terms how does any one photons know where any other photon is at any one time? Or is it that a single photon can be in two places at the same time?

 

This is a puzzle which it is worth contemplating if not least so that we can remember the mystery of the world and that we don't really understand the universe in which we live.

[rain]

&

Edited June 7, 2010 by rain

[Marblehead]

This is a puzzle which it is worth contemplating if not least so that we can remember the mystery of the world and that we don't really understand the universe in which we live.

 

I think I understand what you said. Hehehe. I'm not that knowledgeable in physics but I can balance a bank book.

 

Peace & Love!

[Apech]

I think I understand what you said. Hehehe. I'm not that knowledgeable in physics but I can balance a bank book.

 

Peace & Love!

 

More useful probably.

[rain]

Well if you watch the next section of that documentary they go into the new discovery of plant photosynthesis based on quantum superposition as well -- so there is an "infinite" number of paths literally taken but then the most efficient one is chosen for the actual transmission, thereby enabling 99% energy efficiency.

 

I agree that this level of efficiency is a wave that can not be measured itself -- it's the true meaning of nondualism. We exist within this infinite potential wave as a higher dimension of space.

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We exist within this infinite potential wave as a higher dimension of space."

 

Such beauty postulated

Have you by chance read Ian Mc Ewans book "Solaris" ? ...

 

I just love quoting him;

"Sun is the new rain" & 'Its raining photons"

[Spectrum]

"It is the true meaning of non dualism"

 

surfing the 1st through the third the curves between gravity and light...

[voidisyinyang]

 

 

But that is different from saying that the same particle of energy is going to two different parts of the plant at the same time.

 

 

Instead of traveling a single pathway -- one molecule to the next -- the wave-like energy can actually take three different pathways simultaneously, Scholes said. This wave-like motion provides the energy with a "memory" of where it's been that eliminates some of the randomness of how it moves through the cell, explained van Grondelle. "[it] can still follow many paths," he said, "[but] it will be certainly more directed" than the random walk of classic energy transfer.

 

Read more: Quantum photosynthesis - The Scientist - Magazine of the Life Sciences http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57131/#ixzz0qCwcNNnx

[voidisyinyang]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We exist within this infinite potential wave as a higher dimension of space."

 

Such beauty postulated

Have you by chance read Ian Mc Ewans book "Solaris" ? ...

 

I just love quoting him;

"Sun is the new rain" & 'Its raining photons"

 

Looks cool -- I thought you meant Solaris as the basis for Tarkovsky's amazing movie. Oh yeah that was Stanislaw Lem

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069293/

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_McEwan

 

McEwan's most recent work, Solar, was published by Jonathan Cape and Doubleday in March 2010.[9] In June 2008 at the Hay Festival, McEwan gave a surprise reading of this work-in-progress. According to reportage of the reading in The Guardian, the novel concerns "a scientist who hopes to save the planet."[10] from the threat of climate change, with inspiration for the novel coming from a trip McEwan made in 2005 "when he was part of an expedition of artists and scientists who spent several weeks aboard a ship near the north pole to discuss environmental concerns". McEwan divulged to the audience that "The novel's protagonist Michael Beard has been awarded a Nobel prize for his pioneering work on physics, and has discovered that winning the coveted prize has interfered with his work"[10] but denied that the novel, which was not due to be published for at least two years, was a comedy, saying "I hate comic novels; it's like being wrestled to the ground and being tickled, being forced to laugh"[10], instead, that it had extended comic stretches.

[Marblehead]

Instead of traveling a single pathway -- one molecule to the next -- the wave-like energy can actually take three different pathways simultaneously, Scholes said. This wave-like motion provides the energy with a "memory" of where it's been that eliminates some of the randomness of how it moves through the cell, explained van Grondelle. "[it] can still follow many paths," he said, "[but] it will be certainly more directed" than the random walk of classic energy transfer.

 

Read more: Quantum photosynthesis - The Scientist - Magazine of the Life Sciences http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57131/#ixzz0qCwcNNnx

 

No, No, No. I'm not going there. Hehehe.

 

Yes, the wave can split and different particles can go to different directions. But the same particle going in three different directions? Naw. I ain't buyin' it.

 

I do go along with the thought that there is 'memory' within the plant. I saw a program on TV concerning that a while back and their explanation was very well presented.

 

Yes, there needs be a scheme to things regarding life. Total randomness wouldn't work very well. What we see in animals I believe we can also see in limited processes in plants as well.

 

NO, I don't believe plants have souls. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

[voidisyinyang]

No, No, No. I'm not going there. Hehehe.

 

Yes, the wave can split and different particles can go to different directions. But the same particle going in three different directions? Naw. I ain't buyin' it.

 

 

Quantum coherence describes how more than one molecule interacts with the same energy from one incoming photon at the same time. In essence, rather than the energy from a particular photon choosing one route to pass through the photosynthetic system, it travels through multiple channels simultaneously, allowing it to pick the quickest route. "The energy of the absorbed light is finding more than one pathway to move along at any one time," explains physical chemist Greg Scholes of the University of Toronto, leader of the research group that highlighted the effect. "We can't pinpoint the energy of that light. It's shared in a very special way."

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=shining-a-light-on-plants-quantum-secret

 

Basically, according to this research, an incoming photon created a series of ripples, like a stone thrown into a pond, that interfere with each other to allow the energy wave to explore all potential pathways through a given protein molecule at the same time, allowing no energy to be lost to any wrong paths. It is as if you could drive to work via three different routes at the same time, losing no time or energy to traffic delays on any of the given routes, Scholes says. That allows the photon to travel to the reaction center almost instantaneously.

 

http://www.wbabin.net/science/manzelli8.pdf

 

In fact, the cenral structure of chlorophyll works as a energy-cavity able to accelerate the

entangled photon pairs coherent creation. Hence the emission of fundamental Information energy signals

have the effect of transferring simultaneously, a delocalised superposition of symmetric and asymmetric

units of information between donors and reaction centres. A great distribution of chlorophyll and other

pigments permits transmission of pure Information energy pulses of quantum communication among

spatially distant nodes of the quantum network of reaction centres. Therefore, “Entanglement Photon Pairs”

production modifies the way of undestanding how light transformation happens, without that, the entangled

coherent effect rapidily degenerates in heat waste. Information energy transfer permits that a restricted cavity

of solar energy produces a metastable entanglemen of multi-photon-pairs. Each of them simultaneously

transmits by a quantum breakdown to the fundamental level of information energy, bidimensional Q.bits in

space and time, without producing any interference effects. Hence photosynthetic production of

entanglement photon pairs plays an essential role in bio-quantum energetics.

 

http://www.neuroquantology.com/repository/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=70:the-quantum-dimension-of-photosynthesis&catid=67:classical-vs-quantum-mechanics&Itemid=50

 

They combined three laser pulses as before but used "broadband" light containing many wavelengths and arranged for the protein's emitted light to spread out in both the horizontal and vertical directions, rather than being detected at a single point. Peaks in this two-dimensional light pattern correspond to emission from specific molecules within the protein. Unlike an ordinary one-dimensional spectrum, this map reveals how the electron responsible for a peak became excited--whether it involved coherent coupling or not--and in what combination with other mechanisms.

 

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/41632

 

What the team was looking for were emission frequencies that did not match the excitation frequency, because these would indicate the existence of a superposition of different states. This they did by detecting the quantum-mechanical equivalent of beats, the cyclical peak in volume produced when two sound waves of different frequency interfere with one another. The fact that they did indeed detect such beats is evidence, they say, that the algae takes advantage of quantum coherence.

 

So the photons are just the byproduct of measuring the amplitude of the wave against the phase and frequency.

 

http://sciencewriter.org/quantum-photosynthesis/

 

In a new experiment, Greg Engel and his colleagues found that groups of chlorophyll molecules spend a surprisingly long time in a so-called superposition of states—a quantum phenomenon in which many molecules share excitation energy and so are simultaneously excited and relaxed. The mixtures of different states can show wavelike behavior. For example, they can cancel each other or add up, like waves on a pond do.

 

In the experiment, the team froze chlorophyll complexes from blue algae and shot them with sequences of ultrashort laser pulses, each lasting just 40 femtoseconds, or millionths of a billionth of a second. Three pulses excited the molecules, and a fourth pulse detected interference patterns.

 

The complexes stayed in a superposition of states for more than 600 femtoseconds after receiving the pulses. During that interval, “the system is exploring all areas at once without having to visit each place individually,” Engel says. The paths that transfer energy to the reaction center are energetically favored over those that turn it into waste heat, he proposes.

Edited June 8, 2010 by drewhempel

[voidisyinyang]

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.physorg.com/news113824784.html

 

Now, Jacob Dunningham from the University of Leeds and Vlatko Vedral from the University of Leeds and the National University of Singapore have modified Hardy’s scheme, publishing their results in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters. By eliminating all unphysical inputs, their scheme allows for a real experiment, and ensures that only a single particle exhibits nonlocality. Plus, Dunningham and Vedral’s scheme not only applies to single photons, but to atoms and single massive particles, as well.

 

“The greatest significance of this work is that it shows how superposition and entanglement are the same ‘mystery,’” Dunningham explained to PhysOrg.com. “Feynman famously said that superposition is the only mystery in quantum mechanics, but more recently entanglement has been widely considered as an additional fundamental feature of quantum physics. Here we show that they are one and the same.”

 

...

 

The scientists note an interesting comparison of their result to a principle of Leibniz’s metaphysics, the identity of indiscernibles. According to the principle, a pair of entangled quantum particles must be indiscernible from a single particle, since both objects have in common all the same properties—this is the only stipulation of the principle, number being irrelevant. The single-state nonlocality demonstrated here reinforces the equivalence of a single state and an entangled state—giving more credence to the position that quantum field theory, where fields are fundamental and particles secondary, is a close representation of reality.

Edited June 8, 2010 by drewhempel

[buddhasbellybuttonfluff]

Hi Drew,

 

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0904/0904.2287v5.pdf

 

It is intuitively clear that a particle that lives for an infinitesimally short time

is not observable. However, we have an infinite number of such particles, so could

their overall effect be comparable, or even overwhelming, with respect to a finite

number of “real” particles that live for a finite time? There is a simple intuitive

argument that such an effect should not be expected. The number of “vacuum”

particles is equal to the cardinal number of the set on natural numbers, denoted by

ℵ0. This set has a measure zero with respect to a continuous trajectory, because a

continuous trajectory corresponds to a set of real numbers, the cardinal number of

which is 2ℵ0 [15]. Intuitively, the number of points on a single continuous trajectory

is infinitely times larger than the number of points describing the “vacuum” particles.

Consequently, the contribution of the “vacuum” particles to any measurable effect is

expected to be negligible.

 

http://www.physorg.com/news113824784.html

 

The scientists note an interesting comparison of their result to a principle of Leibniz’s metaphysics, the identity of indiscernibles. According to the principle, a pair of entangled quantum particles must be indiscernible from a single particle, since both objects have in common all the same properties—this is the only stipulation of the principle, number being irrelevant. The single-state nonlocality demonstrated here reinforces the equivalence of a single state and an entangled state—giving more credence to the position that quantum field theory, where fields are fundamental and particles secondary, is a close representation of reality.

Very nice, but these bits also include some seriously bloated intellectual wankery.

 

A simple alternative view of universe based on wave centers can explain the quantum paradox with great consistency. Bearing in mind the Huygens principle of wave fronts, the scientists don't have to propose intrinsically complex theories of "fields as undetectable virtual particles," and therefore I find it reasonable to suggest that only discrete quanta may act as wave centers (i.e. particles). The fundamental forces of interaction have no need of intermediate particles to carry effects, for the wave nature of cosmos guarantees that influences extend and reach without mediators.

 

Space extends as a continuum without limits; wave center quanta have discrete frequencies. Simple, no? God does not play billiards, but rather splashes around in the pond.

 

Blessings

Edited June 8, 2010 by buddhasbellybuttonfluff

[Spectrum]

Water has memory. A lot of our DNA is unused or unusable ? There are how many elements on the periodic table? How many of which we are composed? They are still discovering new elements? What about exstinctions of un discovered species? What will thrive where. Redistribution of water. Micronized Periodicity to weather patterns. What is the other 90+% of our brain doing? Subject Object dissolution dilution solutions reasonable delusions to analytical pollution.

 

Third wave the Pisces Viscera the two together dancing as one and the third in the triad. 123 makes four..

 

here we are. What are we going to do? Hey Drew? What's the maximum distance you've performed an O and D?

Edited June 8, 2010 by Spectrum

[Marblehead]

Well, all I've got to say at this point is that I sure am glad I don't percieve my life at the quantum level. Sheesh! I wouldn't know whether I was coming, going, or standing still.

 

But, you still haven't convinced me that any one single particle can be in more than one place at any given point in time/space.

 

Much of what I read above made logical sense to me. A couple were pretty ... what's the word? ... unbelievable?

 

Peace & Love!

[buddhasbellybuttonfluff]

Hi Marblehead,

 

But, you still haven't convinced me that any one single particle can be in more than one place at any given point in time/space.

Perhaps you should ask it otherwise around: Can you convince anyone that there exists even a single particle with strictly defined limits?

 

But actually, I find your framing of the question flawed. When you ask for the strict space-time coordinates of a particle, you will necessarily omit its momentum, and by measuring its momentum you will omit its location. This, my friend, the physicists call the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, though they misunderstand its proper meaning. When they talk about the wave equation, it gets all fancy, but it distracts from the true lesson here: They want to limit what they call "being" as something which possess an exclusive, static quality. A permanence, if you will.

 

So how do you define this "being?" A presence in a relativistic space-time coordinate map? How do you define presence, if not as something that possess the quality of measurable interaction, so that you could measure it in the first place? And if you insist that this interactivity does not extend unrestricted from this bordered presence, then how can you account for the momentum vector and scalars of mass and charge which may all influence beyond the limit of simple presence, yet certainly constitute as something essential?

 

I must say that definitions can become very limiting when they don't acknowledge the facts of interdependence and change. Nothing the particles may ever carry has anything inherent or unique to that particle, and neither does their interaction with the world happen unilaterally. We call it inter-action after all!

 

You will get paradoxical results as long as you hold on to your contradictory premises of how "being" should manifest.

 

Blessings

Edited June 8, 2010 by buddhasbellybuttonfluff

[Apech]

Well, all I've got to say at this point is that I sure am glad I don't percieve my life at the quantum level. Sheesh! I wouldn't know whether I was coming, going, or standing still.

 

But, you still haven't convinced me that any one single particle can be in more than one place at any given point in time/space.

 

Much of what I read above made logical sense to me. A couple were pretty ... what's the word? ... unbelievable?

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

 

Marbles,

 

Obviously (and you probably realise this) what you experience day to day is the quantum world at a macro level. It's important, I think, to remember that quantum effects are real experimentally verifiable events. In fact without them we would have no semi-conductors and so no computers and we wouldn't be having this conversation. Quantum mechanics was developed to explain observed effects and became very useful when the scientists stopped trying to be mystics and philosophers and got on with the business of developing technologies.

 

The fact is that the ordinary universe that we observe day to day does behave like this … it does behave as if a particle can be in two places at once … it is a fact that it is impossible to fix the position and momentum of a small particle … this is how things are … but the issue is about developing a coherent theory which explains all this in a way that makes sense and works in the real world. Because this is such a challenging issue there are many wild and woolly views which come from theoretical physicists (most of these will end up on the library shelves archived as curious and entertaining dead ends).

 

What's good for Taoists is that some ideas fit very well with the Tao. Change as at the underlying principle of life for instance or interactivity (like yin and yang) generating multiplicity and the relative application of values and so on.

Edited June 8, 2010 by apepch7

[joeblast]

What's so strange about "all paths being known instantaneously, automatically" when the phenomena in question does not perceive time?

 

(The double slit curiosity only manifests at certain size ratios.)

 

As far as two places at once...well...

 

I'll git around to watching the vids

[rain]

Hi Marblehead,

 

 

Perhaps you should ask it otherwise around: Can you convince anyone that there exists even a single particle with strictly defined limits?

But actually, I find your framing of the question flawed. When you ask for the strict space-time coordinates of a particle, you will necessarily omit its momentum, and by measuring its momentum you will omit its location. This, my friend, the physicists call the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, though they misunderstand its proper meaning. When they talk about the wave equation, it gets all fancy, but it distracts from the true lesson here: They want to limit what they call "being" as something which possess an exclusive, static quality. A permanence, if you will.

 

So how do you define this "being?" A presence in a relativistic space-time coordinate map? How do you define presence, if not as something that possess the quality of measurable interaction, so that you could measure it in the first place? And if you insist that this interactivity does not extend unrestricted from this bordered presence, then how can you account for the momentum vector and scalars of mass and charge which may all influence beyond the limit of simple presence, yet certainly constitute as something essential?

 

I must say that definitions can become very limiting when they don't acknowledge the facts of interdependence and change. Nothing the particles may ever carry has anything inherent or unique to that particle, and neither does their interaction with the world happen unilaterally. We call it inter-action after all!

 

You will get paradoxical results as long as you hold on to your contradictory premises of how "being" should manifest.

 

Blessings

 

 

Thank youfor expressing my very morning thought so much better than I ever could have.

 

What if there IS NO ONE PLACE?

Edited June 8, 2010 by rain