RE: Fermi "Paradox"

From: Jeff Davis (jrd1415@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 00:35:41 MDT

  • Next message: Damien Broderick: "new Vinge story in Oct Analog"

    Extropes,

    I've got a question.

    You generate two entangled and undisturbed photons,
    which head off in different directions toward distant
    detectors.

    Detector number one is closer than detector number
    two. Detector number one will be triggered, or not
    triggered--the "wave front" disturbed by a
    measurement, or, alternately, not disturbed by letting
    the "wave front"/photon pass by
    unmeasured/unmolested--before the "wave front"/photon
    reaches detector number two.

    Okay?

    As I understand it, these two photons can be described
    as a wave function, and their being "entangled"
    presupposes/requires that they are "undisturbed",
    which is another way of saying that they have not been
    disturbed by any attempt at measurement, which is yet
    again equivalent to saying that the wave function
    (related to the eigenvector, right?) is "uncollapsed".

    Good so far?

    So now we have a situation where the wave-particle
    duality is fully actualized, no? The two photons can
    become determinate particles at the touch of a
    measurement. Yet before that happens we are
    nevertheless firmly confident--equally certain-- of
    'their' reality. We know that we made them(generated
    them). That we did so in a manner which has in the
    past, with perfect reliability, produced photon pairs
    just like this untouched wave/'pair' to which we are,
    in this moment(once more, with feeling) directing our
    attention. And as before we find ourselves dealing
    with that by-now-familiar quantum condition, that
    quantum indeterminacy thing, where the photons
    exist--their existence not in question, just their
    final, definite, measurable, determinate form, no?
    And when that final state is provoked by the
    inevitable measurement, we will have one photon in one
    place and state, and the second in the other place and
    complementary state, no?

    Okay. If everything is agreeable to this point, then
    here's my question:

    Can it be determined, at detector number two, whether
    the wave function has already--presumably at detector
    number one--been "collapsed", whether the photons have
    already been "disentangled"?

    Best, Jeff Davis

       "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                               Ray Charles

    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
    http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 00:47:02 MDT