Difference between revisions of "Talk:Action at a distance"
From Conservapedia
(reply) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:Non-locality appears in QM in entanglement experiments, the slit-lamp experiment, and perhaps others. I doubt your claim about the limit on speeds is fully settled yet.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:16, 17 July 2009 (EDT) | :Non-locality appears in QM in entanglement experiments, the slit-lamp experiment, and perhaps others. I doubt your claim about the limit on speeds is fully settled yet.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:16, 17 July 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::I am aware of entanglement; i am working on quantum mechanics. I can assure you, in the current commonly accepted interpretation (which i am testing in my work and from which you borrow the expressions and to which you obviously refer to) entanglement does not provide a speedup of information transfer. This is settled. However, if the common interpretation can be unified info another theory (which explains why we observe the relativity and the QM we find in experiments) remains indeed to be seen, but it is beyond my intellectual capacity to write anything about this. An excellent easy to read book about modern Physics and scientists running in one direction (especially string theory) is "Trouble with Physics" written by Lee Smolin. | ||
Revision as of 01:40, August 16, 2009
in QM, are you referring to entanglement experiments? These provide indeed a interesting non-locality but one should specify it a little bit for the readers that - as far as i understand - information (or action) can not be transmitted with speeds higher than normal (for the system). Entanglement results in correlation, not in the possibility to modulate what the other person sees (quantum cryptography usually need a 'classical' channel).
--Stitch75 22:24, 17 July 2009 (EDT)
- Non-locality appears in QM in entanglement experiments, the slit-lamp experiment, and perhaps others. I doubt your claim about the limit on speeds is fully settled yet.--Andy Schlafly 23:16, 17 July 2009 (EDT)
- I am aware of entanglement; i am working on quantum mechanics. I can assure you, in the current commonly accepted interpretation (which i am testing in my work and from which you borrow the expressions and to which you obviously refer to) entanglement does not provide a speedup of information transfer. This is settled. However, if the common interpretation can be unified info another theory (which explains why we observe the relativity and the QM we find in experiments) remains indeed to be seen, but it is beyond my intellectual capacity to write anything about this. An excellent easy to read book about modern Physics and scientists running in one direction (especially string theory) is "Trouble with Physics" written by Lee Smolin.
