Semjase Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 Could this be the breakthrough that wins a Nobel prize and allows us to peek ahead at the future. http://www.tgdaily.com/general-science-brief/69893-schr-dingers-cat-could-be-visible-after-all http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/04/canadian-researchers-take-a-sneak-peek-at-schrodingers-cat-and-a-step-toward-a-quantum-computer/
elfmotat Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 This looks like journalistic sensationalism to me. I fail to see where the uncertainty principle is violated.
Semjase Posted March 5, 2013 Author Posted March 5, 2013 (edited) I think what their talking about is that you can on the first measurement determine the polarization of a photon, yet it still remains in the indeterminate state and that state is then determined by the second measurement. Edited March 5, 2013 by Semjase
swansont Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 The first measurement does not determine the polarization state of the photon. "Repeating the process several times allows accurate statistics to be built up, giving a full, direct characterization of the polarization states of the light." Having to repeat to get enough statistics means one measurement has a larger uncertainty.
Semjase Posted March 7, 2013 Author Posted March 7, 2013 Based on this quote concerning this experiment would you be able with this system, to statically predict the future? "The key to characterizing any quantum system is gatheringinformation about conjugate variables," said co-author Jonathan Leach,who is now a lecturer at Heriot-Watt University, UK. "The reason itwasn't thought possible to measure two conjugate variables directly wasbecause measuring one would destroy the wavefunction before the otherone could be measured." The direct measurement technique employs a "trick" to measure thefirst property in such a way that the system is not disturbedsignificantly and information about the second property can still beobtained. This careful measurement relies on the "weak measurement" ofthe first property followed by a "strong measurement" of the secondproperty. First described 25 years ago, weak measurement requires that thecoupling between the system and what is used to measure it be, as itsname suggests, "weak", which means that the system is barely disturbedin the measurement process. The downside of this type of measurement isthat a single measurement only provides a small amount of information,and to get an accurate readout, the process has to be repeated multipletimes and the average taken. Read more:http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=5692
Alyaarn Posted March 11, 2013 Posted March 11, 2013 Well, to my knowledge, the 2012 Noble Prize for Physics was shared by two physicists who used quantum entanglements to beat the "uncertainty" state of particles. That entire law that revolves around observation of a quantum state (uncertainty) resulting in certainty via probability. Well, these guys were able to find a loophole around this principle. However, I do not know how something this extraordinary could be done. Refernces: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2012/advanced-physicsprize2012.pdf
imatfaal Posted March 11, 2013 Posted March 11, 2013 Well, to my knowledge, the 2012 Noble Prize for Physics was shared by two physicists who used quantum entanglements to beat the "uncertainty" state of particles. That entire law that revolves around observation of a quantum state (uncertainty) resulting in certainty via probability. Well, these guys were able to find a loophole around this principle. However, I do not know how something this extraordinary could be done. Refernces: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2012/advanced-physicsprize2012.pdf From my reading they won the prize for developing two techniques that (amongst other things) allows the investigation of the cross-over from the very small to the macroscopic (the essence of schroedingers cat) and superposition of states in the normally non-quantum experience. They did not according to memory or your quoted document threaten uncertainty principle; although many other pieces of work recently have been hyped by the press as doing this. to my knowledge the HUP is alive, well, and still unbreachable.
swansont Posted March 11, 2013 Posted March 11, 2013 Well, to my knowledge, the 2012 Noble Prize for Physics was shared by two physicists who used quantum entanglements to beat the "uncertainty" state of particles. That entire law that revolves around observation of a quantum state (uncertainty) resulting in certainty via probability. Well, these guys were able to find a loophole around this principle. However, I do not know how something this extraordinary could be done. Refernces: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2012/advanced-physicsprize2012.pdf No, they did not find a loophole. Neither Heisenberg nor uncertainty appears in that link.
Recommended Posts