On 10/21/2019 3:07 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 1:41 AM John Clark <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 6:24 PM Bruce Kellett
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
/> It seems that you think you will just see Young's
interference fringes whatever you do *after* the record is
made at the screen. But that is false,/
Like hell it is! Do you actually think Zeilinger and other
experimental physicists claim they can make a photograph change
before your eyes AFTER it has been taken like something out of
Back To The Future? It was a fun movie but that's not the way
things work.
> as has been demonstrated in many experiments.
That statement is worse than false, you're talking logical
nonsense. The photograph itself contains which way information, if
the photo has no interference pattern then you know the photon
went through one and only one slit, and if it does have a
interference pattern then you know the photon went through both
slits. So if you have the ability and really and truly want to
destroy the which way information *_AFTER_* the photon hits the
photographic plate (or screen) then you MUST destroy the
photograph too and do so before anybody looks at it. In 1801
Thomas Young was not a fool and that's why he had no desire to
destroy his screen *_BEFORE_ *he looked at it, and that's why he
saw a interference pattern; but it's true if he had he would have
not seen a interference pattern, he would not see anything at all
because there would be no screen to look at because he destroyed it.
All your ranting does nothing to enhance your credibility. I quote
from the Xiao-song Ma et al. paper (Zeilinger group): "The authors
proposed to combine the delayed-choice paradigm with the quantum
erasure concept. Since the welcher-weg information of the atoms is
carried by the photons, the choice of measurement of the photons --
either revealing or erasing the atoms' welcher-weg information -- can
be delayed until 'long after the atoms have passed' the photon
detectors at the double slit. The later measurement of the photons
'decides' whether the atoms can show interference not even after the
atoms have been detected. This seemingly counter-intuitive situation
comes from the fact that in a bipartite quantum state the observer
correlations are independent of the space-time arrangement of the
measurements on the individual systems."
In reference to the 144 km Canary Island experiments, they say: "The
other arrangements such that the choice event happens approximately
450 microseconds after the events I_s (recording of interference or
not at the screen) in the reference frame of the source, which puts a
record to the amount of delay by more than 5 orders of magnitude to
the previously recorded quantum eraser experiment."
There is no doubt that they make the choice of whether or not to erase
the welcher-weg information 450 microsecs *after* the photons hit the
screen and are irreversibly recorded.
You clearly do not know what your are talking about.....
Bruce
Here's a good paper analyzing the experiment and showing it's entirely
explained just by the non-local correlation which is exemplified in the
effect of the space-like measurement choice.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1905/1905.03137.pdf
Brent
--
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/9b93e39d-c30a-630c-36de-ecac23b5dc50%40verizon.net.
