observer effect in "realnost"

Matey

AlterZavarovalničar
6. sep 2007
33.955
16.063
113
in kakšna so pa kaj vaša razmišljanja o tej tematiki?
write.gif


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6l5Zh7w9yQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMvsJoYflFE
 

turbobitch

Lesna Goba
5. dec 2007
23.063
1.276
113
42
Kaj si spet jedu? Sicer pa so to pravljice" Ti bo 32 bolje razložil, on hodi k maši
 

jtfc

Guru
Izključen uporabnik
24. jul 2007
19.994
2.719
113
To je bolj zanimivo.... baje da je bilo vesolje enkrat velikosti enega graha. Takrat so se pa naredile povezave med atomi. Ta quantum entangelment pa pravi, pa ko sta dva atoma enkrat povezana sta zmeraj povezana. Torej smo vsi povezani, ker smo vsi iz tistih atomov kot so bili v grahu.

no tole je tole
 

Matey

AlterZavarovalničar
6. sep 2007
33.955
16.063
113
nism še pogledal celega videa ker nimam ravno uro pa pol časa za to ta moment, sm ga pa preletel in je dost zanimiv, ni kej... samo kako je to lahko bolj zanimivo kot pa dejstvo, da je vse drugače dokler se ti ne odločiš pogledat nečesa? oz. vse je tako kot je samo zato, ker smo si mi zamislili, da je tako..... in ravno zato se mi zdi to "nad tem", sploh glede na to, da naj bi tako obnašanje protona oz. majhnih delcev materije že dokazali.

must watch - 5min dolga "risanka", ki prikazuje eksperiment opazovanja in posledic....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc&feature=fvwrel
 

jest5

Guru
18. avg 2007
26.058
-8.741
113
Citat:
Uporabnik jtfc pravi:
To je bolj zanimivo.... baje da je bilo vesolje enkrat velikosti enega graha. Takrat so se pa naredile povezave med atomi. Ta quantum entangelment pa pravi, pa ko sta dva atoma enkrat povezana sta zmeraj povezana. Torej smo vsi povezani, ker smo vsi iz tistih atomov kot so bili v grahu.
No, takrat še ni bilo nobenih atomov. Le zelo vroča juhica iz kvarkov.
Kakršnekoli takratne morebitne povezanosti so izginile med inflacijo, saj se je takrat prostor širil veliko, veliko hitreje, kot lahko potuje informacija.
 

jtfc

Guru
Izključen uporabnik
24. jul 2007
19.994
2.719
113
No na discoveriju so kazali kako so atoma poparčkali.

Potem, ko so ju narazen dali sta ostala povazana. Ko se je spremenil eden se je tudi drugi. (pojma nimam kaj so delal na njiju, nisem kemik).

To, bi pomenilo da je mogoče naredit telefone samo z paparčkanima atomoma notri itd itd.
confused-1.gif
 

jest5

Guru
18. avg 2007
26.058
-8.741
113
Moreš bolj podrobno povedati, kaj imaš v mislih. Parčkali? Povezana? Kakšna razdalja? Kaj dejansko naj bi bilo povezano(najverjetneje kakšen spin elektronov)? Kaj ko se je spremenilo pri enem? ...
 

SamSvoj

Majstr
28. okt 2010
2.142
355
83
Mislim, da je šlo za elektrončke in ne za atome. In ja, spreminjali so jima spin, Ko so ga spremenili enemu, se je isti trenutek spremenil spin tudi drugemu. In to na večji razdalji, mislim da v drugi sobi. Podrobnosti se ne spomnim več ...
 

jtfc

Guru
Izključen uporabnik
24. jul 2007
19.994
2.719
113
Tukaj imaš... na discovery-ju je pa tudi veliko ta oddaja...
Citat:
Quantum entanglement is when a pair of quanta behave as one quantum despite how far apart they might be. For example, when energized Calcium atoms de-energize, they produce an entangled pair of photons. Each has a spin, it could be CCW or CW, we won't know until one of them is measured by a detector. But if one is measured to have a CCW spin, we know the other will also have a CCW spin.

Contrary to what the other answer gave, information is not shared as the measuring of the one causes the other to be the same spin direction instantaneously. Which means faster than light and information cannot travel faster than light. In fact, if you think about, what information is there in the fact that the other photon is always instantaneously the same spin direction as the measured one. It is as though the pair were one photon rather than two.

And that's the weirdness of quantum entanglement. It shows that unlike Al's theories of relativity that require locality to influence things, quantum entanglement does not. The other photon is instantaneously influenced when the first photon is measured... at a distance. It's as though there were two boxes and by finding the cat dead in one would ensure the cat was dead in the other, no matter how far away that second box might be... on the other side of the universe is possible.

There are some theories (WAGs mostly) on how this all works. One of them is that quanta work in the probability world of uncertainty. But when we measure some characteristic, like spin, we force their probability density functions to 1.00 for that characteristic.

And, get this, that changes the probability density function for the other quanta; so that measured characteristic is assured for the other unmeasured quanta as well. In other words (why this is a WAG), the probability density function is what travels faster than light. QM is nothing if not weird.

Quantum superposition simply means all possible outcomes superimposed on each other for the probability density function of each quantum. Each possible outcome can be represented as a term in an infinite series of probability terms. As we move farther out in the series the probability of each possible outcome becomes more and more unlikely... converging on zero probability, but never reaching that value. As the series represents all possible outcomes, its sum is exactly 1.000 because it is absolutely certain that one of the infinite number of possible outcomes will happen.

Again the weirdness of QM. One of the possible outcomes for an electron around the nucleus of an atom is that the electron will pop into space time on the edge of our known universe. That probability term is waaaaaay out there in the infinite series; so its very very small. Some would even say it's too small to really matter, so they treat it as zero. Another is that the electron might be located briefly in the center of the nucleus. They are both possible according to QM, but very very unlikely. The more likely place for that electron, where the probability is greatest, is the same distance (or nearly so) that the old Bohr orbital model would have indicated
 
Nazadnje urejeno:

jest5

Guru
18. avg 2007
26.058
-8.741
113
No, to je nekaj čisto drugega, kot si pisal višje.
Izsevani par fotonov-če kadarkoli izmerimo spin pri enem, vemo spin drugega.

Drugače pa je bilo lani na voljo eno čisto trotel predavanje o osnovah kvantne mehanike
grin1.gif

klik
 
Nazadnje urejeno: