have to say 50/50 likelihood
for a photon coming from either A or B.
-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:51 AM
To: Fred Chen
Cc: 'Everything List'
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:43:10PM -
ginal Message-
> From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:51 AM
> To: Fred Chen
> Cc: 'Everything List'
> Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:43:10PM -0700, Fred Chen wrote:
> ...
&g
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Fred Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "'Everything List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 5:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
>
>
--
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attach
ussell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:51 AM
To: Fred Chen
Cc: 'Everything List'
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:43:10PM -0700, Fred Chen wrote:
...
>
> A better (and far simpler) way to challenge complementarity wou
John M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aan: "Saibal Mitra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: Saturday, August 14, 2004 04:51 PM
Onderwerp: Re: Quantum Rebel - complementarity
> Thanks! Maybe even further?
> John M
> - Original Message -
han the one you
actually measured...
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: "Brent Meeker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aan: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: Saturday, August 14, 2004 10:19 AM
Onderwerp: RE: Quantum Rebel - complementarity
> If it can't deal with EPR, what go
If it can't deal with EPR, what good is it?
Brent Meeker
>-Original Message-
>From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:35 PM
>To: Russell Standish; John M
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel - complementarity
&g
Thanks! Maybe even further?
John M
- Original Message -
From: "Saibal Mitra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "John M"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 10:35 AM
Russell Standish wrote:
Let |i> refer to the state where the photon travels on path i. Then
one can write down a few relations, such as:
|1> = 1/sqrt{2}|3> + 1/sqrt{2}|4> = |5>
|2> = 1/sqrt{2}|3> - 1/sqrt{2}|4> = |6>
If a photon is detected on path 5, then the probability it travelled
along path i
Maybe we should look at deterministic theories, such as:
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0104219
John M wrote:
> Yet it would be refreshing to approach the concept from another side
> (another framework), - maybe a new one??
--- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Fred Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "'Everything List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:43:10PM -0700, Fred Chen wrote:
...
>
> A better (and far simpler) way to challenge complementarity would be to
> use a low-intensity interferogram in a photographic film or CCD. At
> first the photons being detected are few so the shot (particle-like)
> aspect is more
From: "Fred Chen"
> Can there be a transition region where
> both aspects are observable?
It is difficult to observe a one-particle pattern
http://www.optica.tn.tudelft.nl/education/photons.asp
But if you are interested in things like whether there is
an experimental smooth, Yin-Yang type :-
?
-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 11:29 PM
To: Fred Chen
Cc: 'Everything List'
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
It has nothing whatsoever to do with finite width of the absorber.
Adding an infinitesimally thin wire into the exp
It has nothing whatsoever to do with finite width of the
absorber. Adding an infinitesimally thin wire into the experiment is
sufficient to destroy "which way" information.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:24:06PM -0700, Fred Chen wrote:
> Yes I think this is correct.
>
> The theoretical zero amplitude
. The particle-tracking information from each slit
is destroyed by interaction with the wires.
Fred
-Original Message-
From: scerir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 2:12 PM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
It seems (to me, et al.) that the (supposed
Russell Standish wrote:
The presence or absence of the absorber on path 4 changes the
wavefunctions involved, even though the amplitude of the wavefunction
along path 4 is zero.
How exactly does it change the wavefunctions involved? If the outcome of the
experiment is exactly the same, the amplitu
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 11:28:33AM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
> Russell Standish wrote:
>
> Hmm, on rereading the last section of Unruh's article I see you're
> correct--in the second-to-last paragraph he says "However, while in the
> interference experiment, the presence or absence of the absorb
From: "John Collins"
> Essentially Ashfar's experiment involves fooling himself
> (and perhaps a few others) with a new single-path photon
> thoery, then undermning the new theory, whcih was not quantum
> mechanics..
The orthodox QM says that if we have the usual two-slit,
a "which way" detect
- Original Message -
From: "Jesse Mazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
> Is Unruh saying that in figure 2 without the absorber, the amplitude of a
> photon travelling along
Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 01:08:36AM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
Also notice that in the analysis of Afshar's experiment by W. Unruh at
http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/rebel.html which scerir linked to, Unruh does
not dispute Afshar's claim that all the photons from the each pinhole
It seems that Cramer has something to say about
those wires (as diffraction grating).
s.
-
A number of your readers [New Scientist] have pointed out
that Afshar's grid wires are placed in just the positions that
would form a diffraction grating creating an image of pinhole 1
at the pos
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 01:08:36AM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
>
> Also notice that in the analysis of Afshar's experiment by W. Unruh at
> http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/rebel.html which scerir linked to, Unruh does
> not dispute Afshar's claim that all the photons from the each pinhole end
> up in
scerir quotes Basil Hiley saying:
Sure there is an interference effect simply because Afshar's
experiments do not 'follow' anything and they do not 'look at' each
photon as it passes through a pinhole. He is simply collecting and
counting the distribution of photon arrivals at his two detectors.
T
It seems (to me, et al.) that the (supposed) information
Afshar gets about the "which way" at the screen, is
different from the usual information about the "which way"
one gets at the slits, or from the (probabilistic) information
about the "which way" one can have even before the slits
(in case of
Hi Russel
I just came back from vacation and am catching up with the list.
Are you claiming that photon particles are redirected to the detectors
by diffraction around the wires? If so your objection to Afshar's
experiment is not valid because you presupposes that the photons are
waves obeying d
http://www.analogsf.com/0409/altview2.shtml
just Cramer talking about Afshar and MWI
and his transactional interpretation
(but why transactions occur exactly in
the right place and moment is difficult
to realize)
s.
From: "John M"
> I think your e-mails arrived blank
> because you did not write into it.
No no. It is a fuzzy effect. Due to the
signature/attachment, my Outlook,
my Norton Antivirus, and something else.
But I can read now the body of the (blank) message
in the window "properties of the message
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
> Can anyone tell me why the body of the email is blank to some people?
> Is it some overzealous defang program the removes the body as well as
> the attachment?
>
> I don't care if the at
Can anyone tell me why the body of the email is blank to some people?
Is it some overzealous defang program the removes the body as well as
the attachment?
I don't care if the attachment is removed - it doesn't contain
information - its purpose is to authenticate the letter only, and can
be safely
Not me but Russell wrote that. I should have made that clear better when I
posted Russell's attachment (Sorry Russell!).
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: "Jesse Mazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aan: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 08:59 PM
O
Actually, looking at the diagram and explanation of the experiment posted at
http://www.kathryncramer.com/wblog/archives/000674.html I think Saibal Mitra
and the sci.physics.research poster I quoted may have misunderstood what
happened in this experiment. I may have misunderstood, but it sounded
Saibal Mitra wrote:
Now in the article, Afshar claims to have measured which slit the
photon passed through and verified the existence of an interference
pattern. However, this is not the case - without the wires in
place to detect the presence of the interference pattern, photons
arriving at detec
Saibal Mitra fwded
> It may be a question of "interpretations of interpretations of QM",
> however on the basis of the New Scientist article, I don't believe
> Afshar have shown a problem with the complementarity principle.
I agree. But imagine the usual two-slit set-up. And this
unusual screen,
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 04:20 PM
Onderwerp: Re: Quantum Rebel
> I also deleted everything immediately, fearing the viral possibilities of
> the attachments.
>
> Jeanne
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "CMR
I also deleted everything immediately, fearing the viral possibilities of
the attachments.
Jeanne
- Original Message -
From: "CMR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
> Oops, I too was a
-
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: "CMR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aan: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 03:40 PM
Onderwerp: Re: Quantum Rebel
> Oops, I too was a victim of viral paranoia this AM and committed wholesale
> deletion of all attach
Oops, I too was a victim of viral paranoia this AM and committed wholesale
deletion of all attachment laden emails in my box including, apparently,
Russel's. letter. Can someone send or forward me a copy? (of the letter not
a virus) ;)
Thanks!
> Please, Russell,
> for the peace of our minds who
Please, Russell,
for the peace of our minds who believe in 'smart' viruses and have none of
the software you indicated:
Could you at least put a word in the e-mail that thei comes from you? (eg
"Safe from RS" or "from Russ" etc.)
I wanted to open this attachment in blind face and paranoid shiver, h
39 matches
Mail list logo
