TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Time Warp: Delayed-choice quantum erasure

92 点作者 Gnarl3 个月前

13 条评论

anotherpaulg3 个月前
This is a very interesting, novel take on explaining the delayed choice quantum eraser. I think I can summarize it as follows:<p>The signal photon hits the screen, which is a measurement. The entangled idler&#x27;s wave function is thereby constrained by that measurement, influencing the probabilities of <i>later</i> detecting it at each of the D1-4 detectors. It&#x27;s not that the fate&#x2F;erasing of the idler changes the <i>already committed</i> path(s) of the signal. It&#x27;s that the measurement of the signal constrains the subsequent detection of the idler.<p>Two other high quality discussions of eraser experiments are by Sean Caroll [0] and Sabine Hossenfelder [1]. Like the OP, both Sabine and Sean demystify&#x2F;debunk these experiments.<p>These three discussions all use different language to explain the outcome, which is clearly predicted by the QM math. Sean&#x27;s article includes the gist of the math.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.preposterousuniverse.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2019&#x2F;09&#x2F;21&#x2F;the-notorious-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.preposterousuniverse.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2019&#x2F;09&#x2F;21&#x2F;the-not...</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RQv5CVELG3U" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RQv5CVELG3U</a>
wasabi9910113 个月前
I appreciate this article, as I agree with the author that the delayed-choice quantum eraser is a misnomer due to ignoring what we now know of quantum states. It&#x27;s really frustrating learning modern quantum mechanics but then reading about the delayed-choice quantum eraser making conclusions from an older understanding.<p>However, I still haven&#x27;t seen anyone do the math about it. It shouldn&#x27;t be too hard to keep track of a photon&#x27;s state through Kim et al.&#x27;s experiment, and I think it would be clearer than relying on words alone (as done by the author here). I have attempted this myself, but I am particularly terrible at quantum optics. If anyone has seen such a derivation before please let me know.
评论 #43195199 未加载
评论 #43197032 未加载
wnmurphy3 个月前
Our understanding of the world is overfit to the macro level, where we project concepts onto experience to create the illusion of discrete objects, which is evolutionally beneficial.<p>However, at the quantum level, identity is not bound to space or time. When you split a photon into an entangled pair, those &quot;two&quot; photons are still identical. It&#x27;s a bit like slicing a flatworm into two parts, which then yields (we think) two separate new flatworms... but they&#x27;re actually still the same flatworm.<p>Experiments like this are surprising precisely because they break our assumption that identity is bound to a discrete object, which is located at a single space, at a single time.
评论 #43197679 未加载
ziofill3 个月前
Quantum physicist here. My PhD back in the day was about the entanglement between downconverted photons. I&#x27;ve thought about this more than I like to admit.<p>While I appreciate the blog post, it seems a bit disingenuous. I hope everyone understand that if you take two entangled photons A and B and detect A before B, then the outcome of the measurement of B must depend on the outcome of the earlier measurement of A, because measuring A causes the collapse of the joint state and determines the wavefunction of B undergoing the later measurement.<p>The MAGIC about delayed choice measurements is that they work even when the temporal order is UNDETERMINED. By this I mean that the two measurements of A and B can be set up to occur so close in time to each other that there is no time for a signal travelling at the speed of light to travel between the two events. Under this condition, you can witness both orderings (A measured before B and B measured before A) just by changing your reference frame. Under these conditions, the delayed choice experiment STILL WORKS!<p>In this case, there cannot be any argument like &quot;but the idler was measured first&quot;, because &quot;first&quot; does not make any sense.
评论 #43213141 未加载
评论 #43201084 未加载
评论 #43198374 未加载
评论 #43196521 未加载
评论 #43195800 未加载
评论 #43196569 未加载
nayuki3 个月前
A highly visual explanation of the same topic:<p>Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky: Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser - Quantum Physics <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=SzAQ36b9dzs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=SzAQ36b9dzs</a> (26m31s) [2015-07-16]
LPisGood3 个月前
I am I crazy or do Feynman diagrams not explicitly show interactions of particles moving back in time?
评论 #43195475 未加载
评论 #43195425 未加载
评论 #43195466 未加载
评论 #43195456 未加载
评论 #43195139 未加载
calny3 个月前
PBS Spacetime did an interesting video on DCQE, but it tripped me up trying to fully understand what was happening: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs&amp;t=601s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs&amp;t=601s</a> ... Later Sabine Hossenfelder did a video debunking the proposition that DCQE somehow showed that the past was being rewritten. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RQv5CVELG3U" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RQv5CVELG3U</a> And Matt from PBS Spacetime acknowledged she was right in this respectful comment:<p>&gt; Sabine, this is amazing. You are, as usual, 100% right. The delayed choice quantum eraser is a prime example of over-mystification of quantum mechanics, even WITHIN the field of quantum mechanics! I (Matt) was guilty of embracing the quantum woo in that episode 5 years ago. Since then I&#x27;ve obsessed over this family of experiments and my thinking shifted quite a bit.
WhitneyLand3 个月前
Apparently the author writes picture poetry books and has no degree in physics.<p>I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, can anyone speak to his credibility on this topic?
zitterbewegung3 个月前
I did some actual research in making a delayed choice quantum erasure system and the TLDR of why any of these &quot;time travel&quot; results is that what you have to keep in mind is that it is that the entanglement you create you have to still use a classical channel of information to transmit the information as a result which is still bound the speed of light which is what the quantum erasure systems must also show that it doesn&#x27;t occur.
GlibMonkeyDeath3 个月前
I always enjoy reading about quantum optics, and the concept of entanglement is mind-blowing (I mean after all, no less than Albert Einstein went to his grave thinking we must be missing something in the theory.)<p>However, the quantum erasure experiments are really just a variation on other Bell Violation experiments (which also appear to violate causality at first glance.) At their heart the wave functions appear to say that particles are in multiple locations at the same time (so &quot;touching&quot; one particle must affect the state of the other particle instantly.) This information, though, isn&#x27;t useful until all the results are brought back to one location (i.e., all the strangeness is buried in _some combination_ of the lists of results in the different locations, which can only be combined in a way that obeys causality.) Each list of results by itself looks random. So in this sense, &quot;when&quot; exactly you get your result won&#x27;t tell you anything.<p>So no, you can&#x27;t retake that picture you really wanted but flubbed on your last vacation.
TaurenHunter3 个月前
It would be nice if photons from the past could be captured to take pictures of millennia ago.
评论 #43194956 未加载
评论 #43194875 未加载
评论 #43195053 未加载
评论 #43195144 未加载
评论 #43194892 未加载
评论 #43195713 未加载
FollowingTheDao3 个月前
No, and Yes, because there is no &quot;back in time&quot;, nor &quot;forward in time&quot;. Time is just a useful illusion we create to navigate space.<p>This idea is set up on a false premise.<p>But I was extremely happy to read; &quot;There’s no such thing as wave-particle duality&quot; &quot;Light only ever travels as a wave&quot;.<p>Everything is only fundamentally a wave.<p>Please take a look at &quot;The end of time : the next revolution in physics&quot; by Julian Barbour. Or here are some YouTube videos:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=K49rmobsPcY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=K49rmobsPcY</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=GoTeGW2csPk" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=GoTeGW2csPk</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=1ogiQ2E6n0U" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=1ogiQ2E6n0U</a>
评论 #43195986 未加载
评论 #43198488 未加载
EGreg3 个月前
I literally posted about this topic a few days ago! But for some reason it was flagged as a “Dupe” and buried by someone:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43173195">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43173195</a><p>It links here:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chatgpt.com&#x2F;share&#x2F;67bde29f-a56c-800a-8e26-44a5a3ad2326" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chatgpt.com&#x2F;share&#x2F;67bde29f-a56c-800a-8e26-44a5a3ad23...</a><p>I will summarize by saying that I think our current understanding of Faster-than-Light communication is wrong, and the no-go theorem about no information transmission faster than light will be debunked (in very specific but slight ways I describe in the link) soon as quantum error-correction gets better. Before you say it’s preposterous, skim the above chat, maybe looking at my side of it for instance. This is an interesting format I often share ideas in these days.
评论 #43195816 未加载
评论 #43195887 未加载