Time is imaginary and entanglement is null-spatial

[fredrik]

I haven't seen it but if I'm not mistaken he is working within the M-theory framework of string theory. I don't know much about that and while there seems to be interesting fragmentary concepts, I personally find the entire string approach akward as it's IMO focusing on the wrong questions and starts by far too much background structure.

 

I simply have hard to appreciate the method of "string philosophy".

 

But I think if something interesting happens, it will be in the supposedly more fundamental M-theory, and I hope they will find new "first principles" and explain how "strings" are emergent from something else. But I also expect the background structure of theirs to be explained.

 

/Fredrik

[Fred56]

There's a joke (probably already told in this forum) about a string theorist whose wife catches him out with a young female grad.; he says: "Wait, I can explain everything..."

 

Seriously though, I haven't seen materials scientists or chip makers really considering using string-models instead of the QH and other metrics (the quantum fields), usually EM models are seen in such papers. The quantum Hall-effect is a hotly pursued interaction, and they seem to be about to be able to use photons as a reliable channel between quantum information and transistor-level information ('real' bits). It's all fairly heady stuff, and getting a grip on what they are on about possibly requires adv. math concepts (postgrad courses in topology and quantum fields, say), but it depends how much detail, I guess, you personally want to see

[Adib]

An interpretation about space and time in quantum mechanics

 

There was a repeated experiment where at first, two protons are

joined and of opposite spins.

Then, the second is taken far away, and it is acted upon the first

to modify its spin.

The second proton will change its spin to keep it the opposite

of the spin of the first.

For further details :

http://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_24.html#2.4.1

 

Now, if you will assume with me that we can apply the set theory ZFU

to physical space, U (urelements)) being physical space, you will see

that we get an interpretation of the experiment.

 

Indeed, as it is not possible to define a distance in U, the second

proton will not be any more far away from the first.

 

Also, if we consider time to be U, we cannot say that the protons

were separated a long time ago and that there should be no more

influence.

 

Such two hypothesis about space and time were already made in "About

time and time of elementary particles" in ASL Annual Meeting 2005.

It is not yet clear : are space and time alternatively U ? Is U

space-time ?

 

Continuums are still approximations.

 

Mr Andreas Blass pointed out that, in the experiment, the first proton

is acted upon for measurement, and he also pointed out that only the

most used distances are not defined in U.

He is skeptical about the assumptions.

 

As the hypothesis apply to cosmology, the unity of physics would be

increased in such a direction.

 

There was another repeated experiment with a photon, expected to go one

way, going both two quite separated ways.

Here, again, if we assume something else about space, the two ways

would be not that much separated.

 

Adib Ben Jebara Apt F3 Residence Badr Manar 1 Tunis 2092 Tunisia

adib.jebara@topnet.tn

[Fred56]

Time and distance are two "different" properties that we observe. Both exist because of the nature of energy to disperse, and then condense (into atoms, then into stars, and so on). Its otherwise called change. We "observe" and measure this change.

 

It seems that distance is changing, and we assign something called time to this "change in distance", and map this to the "fixed surface" of a rotating body (as we move around it). But both are aspects of change, a fundamental thing about the world. We have to change too (or we stop living), and this is therefore how we "communicate" with and "measure" the world around us.

 

But it doesn't "happen" for free, there is a cost (to the universe and to us lifeforms), This cost is both the required change (expenditure of energy) we need to make (to measure the world and remain alive), and that the world (the universe) also must necessarily make. This is the dispersal (something otherwise known as entropy, the "measurement" of energy change over "time").

Entropy explains lots of stuff.

 

Here's what we're up to with exploring the "distance-free" aspects of matter and light:

It is evident that if we wish to encode more bits onto quantum systems, we have to use more qubits. This results in entanglements in higher dimensions, for example the so-called Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) states, which are entangled superpositions of three qubits ...

 

Although it was shown that GHZ states lead to violent contradictions between a local realistic view of the world and quantum mechanics, it recently turned out that such states are significant in many quantum-information and quantum-computation schemes.

 

For example, if we consider 000 and 111 to be the binary representations of "0" and "7", respectively, the GHZ state simply represents the coherent superposition (1/Ö2)( "0"ñ + "7"ñ). If a linear quantum computer has such a state as its input, it will process the superposition such that its output will be the superposition of the results for each input. This is what leads to the potentially massive parallelism of quantum computers.

 

It is evident that the basis chosen for encoding the quantum information, and the states chosen to represent 0ñ and 1ñ, are both arbitrary. For example, let us assume that we have chosen polarization measured in a given direction as our basis, and that we have agreed to identify the horizontal polarization of a photon with "0" and its vertical polarization with "1". However, we could equally well rotate the plane in which we measure the polarization by 45º. The states in this new "conjugate" basis, 0´ñ and 1´ñ, are related to the previous states by a 45º rotation in Hilbert space

 

0´ñ = (1/Ö2)( 0ñ + 1ñ)

1´ñ = (1/Ö2)( 0ñ - 1ñ)

 

This rotation is known in information science as a Hadamard transformation. When spin is used to encode information in an experiment we can change the basis by a simple polarization rotation; when the directions of propagation are used, a beam splitter will suffice. It is important to note that conjugate bases cannot be used at the same time in an experiment, although the possibility of switching between various bases during an experiment - most notably between conjugate bases - is the foundation of the single-photon method of quantum cryptography.

 

As in classical coding, four different possibilities can be represented by the four Bell states, so the total amount of information that can be encoded onto the two qubits is still two bits. But now the information is encoded in such a way that neither of the two qubits carries any well defined information on its own: all of the information is encoded in their joint properties. Such entanglement is one of the really counterintuitive features of quantum mechanics and leads to most of the paradoxes and other mysteries of quantum mechanics.

 

Coding

Entangled states permit a completely new way of encoding information, as first suggested by Charles Bennett of the IBM Research Division in Yorktown Heights, New York, and Stephen Wiesner of Brookline, Massachusetts, in 1992. Consider the four Bell states: it is clear that one can switch from any one of the four states to any other one by simply performing an operation on just one of the two qubits. For example, one can switch from Y+ñ to Y-ñ by simply applying a phase shift to the second qubit when it is "0" (i.e. 0ñ ® - 0ñ, 1ñ ® 1ñ). The state f+ñ can be obtained by "flipping" the second qubit, while the state f-ñ can be obtained by the combination of a phase shift and flipping.

 

All three of the operations are unitary and they do not change the total probability of finding the system in the states 0ñ and 1ñ. In working with Bell states it is common to refer to four unitary operations: the phase shift, the bit flip, the combined phase-shift/bit-flip, and the identity operator, which does not change the state on which it operates. All four operations are relatively easy to perform in experiments with photons, atoms and ions.

--physicsworld.com

[Mr Skeptic]

What if time really is imaginary, in a [math]\sqrt{-1}[/math] kind of way, and scaled to c? Then to measure a distance in spacetime, you would do [math]s = \sqrt{T^2+x^2+y^2+z^2}[/math], where [math]T = ict[/math], just like any other distance. Time has always been a "special" dimension.

[Fred56]

To me, Time is something that we perceive as ¨emerging¨ from change in distance. You can measure a journey in distance, or in time, and in both, but they are always proportional to each other. Distance is a real feature, and so therefore is time (to us), but what does the universe ´measure´?