From: Zenaan Harkness <z...@freedbms.net>
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 09:10:42AM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
...
> Here, from <http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2464>:
> > The violation of the Bell inequality has a schizophrenic status in
> > physics.  To many of the physicists I know, Nature’s violating the
> > Bell inequality is so trivial and obvious that it’s barely even
> > worth doing the experiment: if people had just understood and
> > believed Bohr and Heisenberg back in 1925, there would’ve been no
> > need for this whole tiresome discussion.

>Seriously, I am none the wiser and cannot yet make sense of what they
>are saying.
>China apparently is putting this experiment in space - are they winning
>a game on prediction of one particular bit with > 75% probability, and
>if so, can they run that game numerous times to get that probability
>close to 100%, and if so, can the random inputs to each side be made not
>random so that the result of the game is transmission of information?
>I cannot begin to answer any of these questions sorry...

I will explain what I think they are doing in the fiber-optic version of the 
experiment,at least so nobody is permanently misled by my previous analogy.
Imagine a central location on earth, let's call it Location B.  20,500 meters 
west of that is Location A, and 20,500 meters to the east of "B" is Location C. 
 There's anoptical fiber going from "A" to "B", and another optical fiber going 
from "B" to "C".Two entangled photons are produced at Location B, then one is 
launched into fiber going to "A", and the other photon is launched from "B" 
into the fiber going to "C".
After about 100 microseconds later (since the speed of light in that fiber is 
about 'c'/1.4584, where 1.4584 is the index of refraction of infrared in 
silica, thus 205.5 meters /microsecond), those photons emerge from their 
respective ends.  Notnecessarily at the same time, because the length of the 
fibers may not be quiteidentical.  They do the detection at Location A, and 
through prior arrangement theyschedule the detection at "C" a few nanoseconds 
later, possibly adjusting the physical length of the fiber to get the timing 
close to being correct..  Good synchronization could be achieved by 
GPS-controlled clocks, or perhaps a third fiber being used to synchronize local 
clocks at "A" and "C".
They first detect at "A", and then detect at "C".  And they might reverse the 
order, forcompleteness.  But that's not the end:To determine that there has 
been more than a 50% correlation of the measured spins, they haveto transmit 
the type (angle) of measurement they make by ordinary optical fiber.  
(Although,it wouldn't have to be on an optical fiber:  It could be a USB memory 
stick glued to theshell of a fast snail, I suppose.  the important thing is 
that the information eventually getsto the other side, not how fast it takes to 
get there.)
  The information eventually gets to the other end, and they do the 
calculations andverify that SOMEHOW, the fact that a measurement at "A" somehow 
affected themeasurement at "C".   If they "schmoo plot" (meaning carefully 
adjust, then plot on a graph)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmoo   , they can 
determine how fast some affecting particle or signal would have to travel to 
affect the receiver at the other end.  Since the delay from Location "A" to 
"Location "C" would be (100+100) = 200 microseconds in a fiber, it would be 
200/1.4584 = 137.136 microseconds from location A to location C,by air.  (or in 
a vacuum, or by radio, etc.)
That figure I found from an article a few years ago, that said it would have to 
travel at least 10,000x that of 'c' to affect the measurement, would require 
that the delay is measured by:137.136 microseconds/10,000 = 13.7126 
nanoseconds.   If the measurement at "A" occurred only 13.7136 nanoseconds 
before the measurement at "C", and yet there wasstill correlation, this shows 
that a velocity of at least 10,000 'c' to affect the outcome at "C".
Therefore, I conclude that it would be easy to measure the minimum effective 
speed of the 
hypothetical interfering particle or wave.  That particle or wave would have to 
travel 41,000meters in less than 13.7 nanoseconds, to achieve that 
interference.  Time measurement to 1 nanosecond is easy, to 1 picosecond is 
doable, and in fact measurement of time valuesfar less than 1 picosecond can be 
accomplished.
             Jim Bell


  

Reply via email to