Page 1 of 1

Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 12:54
by Massive Attack
Come on Mike, you big old brainbox you, what's it all about...



https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1AxXE9UD1z/

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 17:48
by Hammer and Pickle
Former British Telecom technicians know all about how the be at work while being down the boozer at the same time. It’s a kind of magic.

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 17:18
by Mike Oxsaw
Cabbige Savage" wrote: 15 Nov 2024, 17:07 funny when he turn black

Image
Swantum Leap. A rip in the Carpinium.

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 17:07
by Cabbige Savage
funny when he turn black

Image

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 16:51
by Mike Oxsaw
Massive Attack" wrote: 15 Nov 2024, 16:17
Yeah, right, and Paul or Tyson?!

As a girl's name? Neither sound particularly appealing.
 

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 16:17
by Massive Attack
Mike Oxsaw" wrote: 15 Nov 2024, 14:21 Quantum Physics is fucking nuts (probably why I love reading about it).

The main issue is that we lack the personal experiences and language to adequately explain it.

Monkeys haven't yet evolved enough. "To be or not to be?", in the quantum world is "To be and not to be." Them's the apples of reality.

Simple example.

Question: Is light a wave or a stream of photons (particles)?

Answer:Yes.

We lack the language to describe even light as it really is (See the double-slit experiment for a hint, and, no, that's not a reference to floodlit split-arse football).

What's more, everything at the quantum level is based on probabilities - What's the probability of an electron being in a particular place at any given time?

The reason a wall doesn't suddenly move 100 feet down the road is that the probability of all the particles in that wall moving the same way at the same time is infinitesimally small (but not non-zero).

The maths supporting this is solid but way beyond most; yes, even me for large parts of it. Almost nothing against which to reference it in the world we "know".

Quantum entanglement is also interesting as has been proven as a fact, yet still nobody is sure how it happens. The experiments are done with photons & electrons but I prefer a more humanity level description.

Imagine there are 2 tennis balls stuck together, spinning incredibly quickly. One Red, the other Blue but there is no way you can know which is which - it's a purple splodge.

Now if these tennis balls suddenly fly apart, there's then nothing (of which we are aware) connecting them; what we have is two smaller purple splodges (we haven't looked yet) moving away from each other.

Now, if you look at one - and only one - of these purple splodges, it resolves itself as either Red or Blue. Nothing really that remarkable.

However at the very instant you determine the colour of "your" splodge. the other - distant one - immediately takes on the opposite colour.

OK, you might say, what's the problem?

"Immediate" is the problem because information about "your" splodge can only travel at the speed of light to the other one and so, by the (currently understood) laws of physics there should be a (measurable) delay in the other splodge resolving and revealing  it's "true colours". There isn't

How does the other splodge even know you've looked at "your" splodge, let alone then become the opposite colour?

Like I said. It's fucking nuts -and that's without even considering there's no such thing as  a universal "now".

My advice is to go pour yourself a good stiff drink and ease yourself into the weekend. I tend to do so when reading about this shit and it gets too heavy. Don't get any answers but I give slightly less of a fuck.
Yeah, right, and Paul or Tyson?!

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 14:27
by Far Cough UKunt
Quantum spin is fucking mind bending.

Einstein didn't grasp quantum theory at first, he famously said that "God doesn't play dice" but apparently, he does.

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 14:21
by Mike Oxsaw
Quantum Physics is fucking nuts (probably why I love reading about it).

The main issue is that we lack the personal experiences and language to adequately explain it.

Monkeys haven't yet evolved enough. "To be or not to be?", in the quantum world is "To be and not to be." Them's the apples of reality.

Simple example.

Question: Is light a wave or a stream of photons (particles)?

Answer:Yes.

We lack the language to describe even light as it really is (See the double-slit experiment for a hint, and, no, that's not a reference to floodlit split-arse football).

What's more, everything at the quantum level is based on probabilities - What's the probability of an electron being in a particular place at any given time?

The reason a wall doesn't suddenly move 100 feet down the road is that the probability of all the particles in that wall moving the same way at the same time is infinitesimally small (but not non-zero).

The maths supporting this is solid but way beyond most; yes, even me for large parts of it. Almost nothing against which to reference it in the world we "know".

Quantum entanglement is also interesting as has been proven as a fact, yet still nobody is sure how it happens. The experiments are done with photons & electrons but I prefer a more humanity level description.

Imagine there are 2 tennis balls stuck together, spinning incredibly quickly. One Red, the other Blue but there is no way you can know which is which - it's a purple splodge.

Now if these tennis balls suddenly fly apart, there's then nothing (of which we are aware) connecting them; what we have is two smaller purple splodges (we haven't looked yet) moving away from each other.

Now, if you look at one - and only one - of these purple splodges, it resolves itself as either Red or Blue. Nothing really that remarkable.

However at the very instant you determine the colour of "your" splodge. the other - distant one - immediately takes on the opposite colour.

OK, you might say, what's the problem?

"Immediate" is the problem because information about "your" splodge can only travel at the speed of light to the other one and so, by the (currently understood) laws of physics there should be a (measurable) delay in the other splodge resolving and revealing  it's "true colours". There isn't

How does the other splodge even know you've looked at "your" splodge, let alone then become the opposite colour?

Like I said. It's fucking nuts -and that's without even considering there's no such thing as  a universal "now".

My advice is to go pour yourself a good stiff drink and ease yourself into the weekend. I tend to do so when reading about this shit and it gets too heavy. Don't get any answers but I give slightly less of a fuck.

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 13:55
by claypole
Schrödinger's link theory.
You dont know if the link is alive or dead until you click on it?

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 13:47
by Gank
Oxsaw learned all this in nursery and still remembers every word.

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 13:26
by Massive Attack
This was supposed to be a "nice and easy one for a Friday", that I can't even post the fucking link correctly.. 

So anyways, who's going to win the fight of century, Jake Paul or Mike Tyson?? 

Re: Quantum entanglement (nice and easy one for a Friday)

Posted: 15 Nov 2024, 12:57
by stubbo-admin
1. Follows Link
2. Gets message, "Video is no longer available".

Excellent. Would read again. SWT