Re: QM, A-B, and the Z

2003-01-04 Thread Jim Choate

On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote:

 And no, Relativity and QM have -not- been joined into a -single cohesive theory-.

 You have to qualify this.

No, I don't.

 General relativity has not been unified with quantum mechanics in any
 way that is universally accepted yet, but the superstring and M-Theory
 cats may be closing in.

We aren't playing horse-shoes or handgrenades. Almost doesn't count.

 Special relativity is of course a completely diferent story.

That's the almost there, you're flogging a dead horse here.

 Double whaledreck (I actually never heard that phrase before...)

Read Brunner, it's an actual word. It's what's left over after all the
good stuff at a whaling station has finished with a carcass.

 First of all, an intermediate vector boson is not even remotely a photon,

It sure as hell ain't a Fermion...

Let's take the definition of a boson from Q is for Quantum (pp. 58,
ISBN 0-297-81752-3):

A particle which obeys Bose-Einstein statistics. All bosons have integer
spin (1, 2, and so on). They are the particles associated with the
transmission of forces (for example, the photon carries the
electromagnetic force)

I believe we're done here.


 --


  We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I
  are going to spend the rest of our lives.

  Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space

  [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
  www.ssz.com   www.open-forge.org





QM, A-B, and the Z

2003-01-03 Thread Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer
Jim Choate wrote...

Burrowing into what I claimed is 'wacky crapola' I discovered a nugget of truth I can 
agree with (but it'll take a minute to get there...)




And no, Relativity and QM have -not- been joined into a -single cohesive theory-.

You have to qualify this. General relativity has not been unified with quantum 
mechanics in any way that is universally accepted yet, but the superstring and 
M-Theory cats may be closing in.

Special relativity is of course a completely diferent story. Much pof modern QM would 
be impossible without it, and relativistic considerations are a mundane part of 
high-energy particle and accelerator work.





What I -am- saying is that in this specific issue (ie behavior of
entangled photons -or- two slip experiments) the 'problem' of instant
state changes over distance doesn't actually happen. The reason being that the state 
changes are -not- taking place in -our time-space framework- but the -photons-. These 
two time-space frameworks are -not- the same.

Well, I might be willing to agree with you...kind of. The little intuition I've been 
able to build up about EPR is that the uncollapsed wavefuction for the correlated 
photons isn't aware of 'distance' or other measurement parameters. Distance and time 
are only encountered during the measurement process, and only then is there 'two 
photons'...kind of a physical kenosis.




Whaledreck. How does the electron interact with -any- EM field (ie
voltage)? Via an 'intermediate vector boson', that's how. What is that
particle? A -photon-. How much difference in distance or time is there
-from the perspective of the photon- between the electron and the shielded field? 
Answer, none. The reality is that the 'shield' is -only- a shield in our frame of 
reference, it's nothing from the photons...

Double whaledreck (I actually never heard that phrase before...)

First of all, an intermediate vector boson is not even remotely a photon, but I doubt 
that's germane to the argument. (But physicists do not invoke Z-particles to explain 
this kind of interaction. In fact, right now there is no particle-based explaination 
for this interchange.)

Second (and this does matter, from what I'm reading into your writing), A-B uses an 
electron beam that is split, and the upper and lower halfs of this beam made to 
reconverge on the other side of a toroidal-protected hole. In that hole is a voltage, 
and A-B easily predicts that the relative phase of the electrons as they recoverge 
will be different, and the magnitude of the phase change is directly proportional to 
the voltage in the hole, that they are completely 'unaware' of in the classical sense.

The point for me here is that one can not extend classical thinking to account for 
this. (In fact, its very hard to extend common sense to understand this.) How do the 
electrons 'see' that voltage? Through what mechanism? According to quantum theory, it 
clearly appears that (like in EPR) they are aware of that field without interacting 
with it at all. There's no particle exchange.



It isn't a problem of physics, it's a problem of imagination.

Well, that's basically MY point. QM seems to be telling us something about reali9ty, 
but we can't imagine what it is (David Duetch and a few others have tried). We don't 
have a picture yet ot go with our data and theories.

But if I have time, I'll repost about why a 'Cypherpunk' (of any stripe, not just 
CACL...is that still a Cypherpunk?)...cares, or should. (Well, kinda...)