On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 5:42:45 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 5/30/2019 2:47 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 4:38:10 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >>> *Quantum Cheshire Cat effect may be explained by standard quantum >>> mechanics.* >>> >>> >>> >>> @philipthrift >>> >> > You imply that detecting the spin on a path different from the object is > somehow contrary to standard quantum mechanics. I don't see that. It's > just contrary to an assumption about the interaction of position > measurements and spin measurements, i.e. the assumption that they have to > happen at the same place. It's no more strange than violating the > assumption that a particle can't go thru two different slits at the same > time. > > *"In no way this is a definitive answer," Corrêa said. "As usual in > science, new explanations can always show up and are always welcome, and > that's what characterizes its development. In fact, we can't even say that > we proved the authors wrong in their interpretation—we simply provided a > different interpretation of the results.* > > > Brent >
'*Quantum Cheshire Cat' as Simple Quantum Interference* Raul Corrêa, Marcelo França Santos, C. H. Monken, Pablo L. Saldanha https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0808 In a recent work, Aharonov et al. suggested that a photon could be separated from its polarization in an experiment involving pre- and post-selection [New J. Phys 15, 113015 (2013)]. They named the effect 'quantum Cheshire Cat', in a reference to the cat that is separated from its grin in the novel Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Following these ideas, Denkmayr et al. performed a neutron interferometric experiment and interpreted the results suggesting that neutrons were separated from their spin. Here we show that these results can be interpreted as simple quantum interference, with *no separation* between the quantum particle and its internal degree of freedom. We thus hope to clarify the phenomenon with this work, by removing these apparent paradoxes. > > The "Cheshire Cat" claim that a property can be separated from the > particle is just* pseudoscience*, as far as I can tell. > > @philipthrift > -- > > *no more strange than violating the assumption that a particle can't go thru two different slits at the same time* So an 810-atom molecule that is sent from source to screen does that too? The experiment can be done with entities much larger than electrons and photons, although it becomes more difficult as size increases. The largest entities for which the double-slit experiment has been performed were molecules that each comprised 810 atoms (whose total mass was over 10,000 atomic mass units). A lot of *quantum pseudoscience* is made with misguided interpretations. @philipthrift -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c6fca1d1-ca30-4538-a9a0-e483a9a527d3%40googlegroups.com.
