Jump to content

It's a Holographic World


Kyrisch

Recommended Posts

No, really, it's not very in-depth. There's very little real science described, and several mistakes (e.g. insisting that it's instantaneous communication). There's a limit to how well you can describe the science using macroscopic analogies and philosophical comparisons with other phenomena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a limit to how well you can describe the science using macroscopic analogies
Yep. Especially when dealing with quantum effects.

 

Kyrisch: any site which makes such a fundemental mistake as insisting that entanglement allows instantaneous communication cannot really be trusted.

 

Nice picture from The Matrix though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the aim was to dumb it down for the general public... It was an interesting read though. I sort of meant in-depth as in I understood it better than when I was explained to me in quantum mechanical terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that Quantum Entanglement does suggest instantaneous communication (or 'transfer of information' to be precise) albeit not necessarily across distances greater than the sub-atomic. Can someone please explain (simply!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that Quantum Entanglement does suggest instantaneous communication (or 'transfer of information' to be precise) albeit not necessarily across distances greater than the sub-atomic. Can someone please explain (simply!).

 

 

2 entangled particles

 

A B

 

Someone measures quantity Q at A to be a, this means that Q at B must be b.

Someone at B has no knowledge of the A measurement so makes the same measurement and finds that Q at B is b, thus telling him that Q at A is a. Neither can tell anything to the other one about what thye know faster than the speed of light, if the person at A changes Q at A to be b, that will NOT effect B in any way faster than the speed of light.

 

Kyrisch: there is a common saying about QM that goes something like "if you think you understand it, you're wrong"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kyrisch: there is a common saying about QM that goes something like "if you think you understand it, you're wrong"...

Ten bucks you don´t have the guts to go into an exam saying "I have no idea about QM, which is great because ...".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I talked about the Bohm interpretation on another thread. It was basically constructed to demonstrate that non-local hidden variable theories are possible. It isn't supposed to be an accurate description of the universe.

 

Although I did post in Speculations, before reading about the Bohm interpretation, about something similar. It was more just sophistry coming from the perspective of "If I had to come up with a data structure to store the universe, how would I design it?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.