Question about quantum entanglement

[kingstealth]

It's not about us solving it, it's about some geeks having fun trying to understand what is known, what is not known, and what can theoretically be known.

First of all it was a joke, like you said having some fun with the 3 variable "known(s)". Im surprised you didnt pick up on it, so with that being said I will try to post according to the 3 known(s) and have some fun with it

 

[Further]

First of all it was a joke, like you said having some fun with the 3 variable "known(s)". Im surprised you didnt pick up on it, so with that being said I will try to post according to the 3 known(s) and have some fun with it

Got it. My head was elsewhere. By the way, welcome on board and its nice haing a new brave soul enter the OT section. few do.


There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
Donald Rumsfeld

 

[kingstealth]

Got it. My head was elsewhere. By the way, welcome on board and its nice haing a new brave soul enter the OT section. few do.


There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
Donald Rumsfeld

Im going to brush up on QE...I didnt know I was spinning Rumsfeld

 

[kingstealth]

Thats me playing the cat in GOD's picture.....I had to be cool the camera was on me.

 

[Further]

Thats me playing the cat in GOD's picture.....I had to be cool the camera was on me.

I didn't realize there was a cat in that picture.

 

[TripTango]

The problem is that the receiver can't know which particle has been has been observed until they look and observe, automatically severing all the entanglements making all particles appear to be separated and all the particles appear to standing for an affirmative message.

Let me know if this makes no sense, I have the unenviable task trying to explain an idea I hardly understand, even though it was my idea.

It's a good thought-experiment, and an even better explanation of why it would almost certainly fail.

 

[TripTango]

I'm by no means up to speed on this, but I was under the generic impression that particle spin was not simultaneously observable? As in, if I can observe one particle's spin, (similar to Pauli) the other must be opposite?

Correct, if you are saying what I think you are saying. When you observe one of the entangled particles, you "collapse" it into a single state (where before it had none/both), and simultaneously collapse its partner into the opposite state. So, in effect you are observing both.

 

[MARIS61]

I thought this thread was going to be about dating 4 women simultaneously.

 

[Further]

I thought this thread was going to be about dating 4 women simultaneously.

That's far too difficult to wrap my brain around. I'll stick with the relative simplicity of simple relativity and QM

 

[crowTrobot]

When you observe one of the entangled particles, you "collapse" it into a single state

or... all possible states still exist in different infinitely branching realities and there is no actual collapse - you (one of an infinite "you") just fork to a particular branch and are only aware of the state on that branch.

 

[Further]

or... all possible states still exist in different infinitely branching realities and there is no actual collapse - you (one of an infinite "you") just fork to a particular branch and are only aware of the state on that branch.

Damn you crow. You just made my problem infinitely more complex.

 

[kingstealth]

Can dark energy be factored in quantum mechanics.....can this mysterious energy be part of the relationship between 2 particles?

Is dark energy a known unknown?

 

[kingstealth]

Quantum jumpimg

if i dont get a reply Ill start quantum jumping
I think crow is quantum jumping....just fork to a particular branch

 

[crowTrobot]

Damn you crow. You just made my problem infinitely more complex.

well, if your problem is just faster than light signaling that interpretation of QM theoretically resolves it : )

 

[crowTrobot]

Can dark energy be factored in quantum mechanics.....can this mysterious energy be part of the relationship between 2 particles?

Is dark energy a known unknown?

Dark Energy is an unknown unknown, but I think the most popular guess is that it's just an intrinsic property of space, not a "force" between particles.

 

[Denny Crane]

Ironic that Dark Energy is a sort of God of the Gaps.

Granted it's more plausible that there is some invisible force that's everywhere that has the immense power to accelerate entire galaxies.

 

[Denny Crane]

^^^ That was entirely tongue in cheek, though there's a grain of truth to it.

 

[Further]

So I wanted to freshen up on my understanding of dark matter and dark energy and found this wonderful video from TED on the subject. Just thought I'd share it, it's only about a half hour long, and well worth it for gaining a basic understanding.
[video]

 

[kingstealth]

This has been a great thread.....i might have seen it before but will ck it out anyway and I now understand what God and Crow are talking about. cool stuff

 

[TripTango]

or... all possible states still exist in different infinitely branching realities and there is no actual collapse - you (one of an infinite "you") just fork to a particular branch and are only aware of the state on that branch.

Yup. The details of the "collapse" are fuzzy and intriguing -- hence the quotation marks.

In our reality, from our perspective, that is what it appears to do.

 

[Eastoff]

There is a new particle which is it's own anti-particle, as the current flavor of the week for dark energy

 

[Further]

There is a new particle which is it's own anti-particle, as the current flavor of the week for dark energy

link? I want to know more. Is it a particle that has been produced by LHC or is LHC theorized to be able to create the particle?

 

[crowTrobot]

There is a new particle which is it's own anti-particle, as the current flavor of the week for dark energy

Probably refers to dark matter, not dark energy which is a different subject.

 

[Eastoff]

link? I want to know more. Is it a particle that has been produced by LHC or is LHC theorized to be able to create the particle?

this

 

[Eastoff]

Probably refers to dark matter, not dark energy which is a different subject.

You are correct, i'm very sorry.

 

[Further]

this

I don't quite understand. but then again, i suppose most people don't either. So this is a particle that is not actually a particle but a group of particles that act as a particle that can be either the particle or the anti-particle. And then to understand how that would elucidate dark matter spins my head around and around. hopefully tonight I'll have a little more time while not at work to try and read a bit more.

If anyone understands, please dumb it down as much as you can so even I can understand.

Anyway, cool stuff for sure. repped.

 

[Further]

Ok, so I've read a couple more articles on the Majorana Fermions, most seem to be too complex or too simplistic. But between the wiki link provided by westnob and the following article, I think a basic understanding can be gleaned.

http://www.sci-news.com/physics/article01146-dark-matter-majorana-fermion.html

Sci-news.com
Title - Dark Matter May Be Made Out of Majorana Fermions, Say Physicists

Previous studies have suggested that dark matter is made from Majorana fermions, whose existence was predicted in 1937 by the Italian physicist Ettore Majorana. In the new study, Vanderbilt scientists have performed detailed calculations that demonstrate that these particles are uniquely suited to possess a rare, donut-shaped type of electromagnetic field called an anapole. This field gives them properties that differ from those of particles that possess the more common fields possessing two poles (north and south, positive and negative) and explains why they are so difficult to detect.

“There are a great many different theories about the nature of dark matter. What I like about this theory is its simplicity, uniqueness and the fact that it can be tested,” said co-author Prof Robert Scherrer.

“Most models for dark matter assume that it interacts through exotic forces that we do not encounter in everyday life. Anapole dark matter makes use of ordinary electromagnetism that you learned about in school – the same force that makes magnets stick to your refrigerator or makes a balloon rubbed on your hair stick to the ceiling.”

“Further, the model makes very specific predictions about the rate at which it should show up in the vast dark matter detectors that are buried underground all over the world. These predictions show that soon the existence of anapole dark matter should either be discovered or ruled out by these experiments.”

The existence of dark matter was also first proposed in the 1930′s to explain discrepancies in the rotational rate of galactic clusters. Scientists hypothesize that dark matter cannot be seen in telescopes because it does not interact very strongly with light and other electromagnetic radiation. In fact, astronomical observations have basically ruled out the possibility that dark matter particles carry electrical charges.

More recently, though, several physicists have examined dark matter particles that don’t carry electrical charges, but have electric or magnetic dipoles. The only problem is that even these more complicated models are ruled out for Majorana particles. That is one of the reasons that Vanderbilt scientists took a closer look at dark matter with an anapole magnetic moment.

“Although Majorana fermions are electrically neutral, fundamental symmetries of nature forbid them from acquiring any electromagnetic properties except the anapole,” said study co-author Dr Chiu Man Ho. The existence of a magnetic anapole was predicted by the Soviet physicist Yakov Zel’dovich in 1958. Since then it has been observed in the magnetic structure of the nuclei of cesium-133 and ytterbium-174 atoms.

Particles with familiar electrical and magnetic dipoles, interact with electromagnetic fields even when they are stationary. Particles with anapole fields don’t. They must be moving before they interact and the faster they move the stronger the interaction. As a result, anapole particles would have been have been much more interactive during the early days of the Universe and would have become less and less interactive as the Universe expanded and cooled.

The anapole dark matter particles would annihilate in the early Universe just like other proposed dark matter particles, and the left-over particles from the process would form the dark matter we see today. But because dark matter is moving so much more slowly at the present day, and because the anapole interaction depends on how fast it moves, these particles would have escaped detection so far, but only just barely.

 

[Further]

Also check out this link but it expects you to have a little more knowledge to start with. It actually gets pretty technical, but still some good info to e learned.
http://www.lanl.gov/hep/workshops/sf10/talks/ChackoSF10.pdf

 

[Eastoff]

Whoa have you seen what an anapole looks like? the field lines are bizarre.

 

[Further]

Think of a donut, how the field lines would look if emanating from, and looping back, through the hole. Cool stuff. I don't quite get it yet, I'll dance around this subject for a while and hopefully it will come into better focus. What's cool is this is actually all testable. They should have an answer if these particles are the likely culprit behind dark matter in a couple years. I love a testable hypothesis!