On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 1:15 AM Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On 7/30/2018 9:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 11:21 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> > wrote: > >> From: Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> >> >> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:33 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> >> wrote: >> >>> From: Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> >>> >>> >>> You can use "itself" only if this "it" can be in multiple locations and >>> heading in different directions. >>> >>> >>> That is a property of waves. But you will only ever observe a single >>> photon from this wave..... >>> >> >> Waves/Photons, doesn't matter what you call them. >> >> Within the quantum computer this wave/photon is simultaneously in many >> different locations/doing many different things, performing computations >> and doing useful work using all of its separate superposed instances of >> itself. Once it's done doing all this work it settles down on a final >> value which we can read. And it will be correct, and may have finished an >> enormous computation in a short period of time, if and only if, it did in >> fact split up and do all these independent things simultaneously. >> >> >> Or you can view the action of a quantum computer as a simple interference >> effect. Incorrect solutions to the algorithm destructively interfere. You >> don't have to introduce ideas such as 'being in different locations and >> doing different things.' It is just simple interference in a wave. (And it >> is all in one world, because interference can only occur within the one >> world.) >> >> >> > To add some clarity, I would say interference effects of a superposed > system can only be seen from the vantage point of another system which has > not interacted with that superposed/interfering system. > > > I don't know what "seen from a vantage point" means, but you can't see > anything without interacting with it. > > > > >> >> On that we agree. But where did those other photons come from? How did >>> they get to be in different positions going in different directions? >>> >>> >>> They aren't. >>> >> >> How do do you explain the experiment with beam splitters and recombining >> light at a half silvered mirror to interfere and only be reflected one way? >> >> >> Photons have both wave-like and particle-like properties. That is quantum >> physics. >> >> So do you accept or reject that this "wave" can be in different places >> simultaneously? >> >> >> A wave is not a localized object, so the same wave can extend to >> different locations. >> > > So then "a photon is not a localized object, so the same photon can extend > to different locations." -- is this right or wrong? > > > Right. But it's localized in in the same world if it interferes with > itself; and of course it is never spacelike separate from itself. > I don't understand that last part "it is never spacelike separate from itself", isn't that what beam splitters do, cause spacelike separations of a photon? Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
