On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 07:11:11 +0100
oshwm <[email protected]> wrote:
> would the case for no data travel require that both particles exist
> in the same space and time?
> also, if measuring a quantum object
> changes it, can you not measure twice or similar using the
> measurements to both derive its original state and return it to its
> original state?
Going by BF's description, states don't really matter. All that
matters is that you can do something to one of the particles
and that action triggers a change in the other particle, a
change that you can detect. If you can do something 'at will' to
one particle, and then detect a change in the other particle,
you have transmitted one bit.
>
> (yep, now the schoolboy physicists are getting involved :D )
Ever heard stories about naked rulers, or emperors without
clothes?
>
>
> On 5 August 2016 06:58:15 BST, juan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 07:19:19 +0200
> >Bastiani Fortress <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> As i can remember, the point was when two particles are entangled,
> >> they bear the same quantum state, and they simultaneously shift
> >> their states önce either of them is "observed".
> >
> > OK.
> >
> >> So you know that the other
> >> twin is in the same state, but you cannot code it at will,
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by "code it".
> >
> >
> >> and since
> >> you don't know its first state without having "observed" it, you
> >> cannot determine whether the other twin has been observed or not
> >
> > And now I'm even more confused =P
> >
> > But let's go back to your first sentence. You have a couple
> > of 'entangled' particles. Trying to measure particle 'A'
> > triggers a change in particle 'B' - is that what you are
> > saying?
> >
> > If that's the case, then you do have 'information transfer' -
> > one bit.
> >
> >
> >> (that would be 1 bit of data streaming).
> >>
> >> This is what i remember from what i read years ago, please correct
> >> me if i'm wrong.
> >>
> >>
