Entanglement Between Photons that have Never Coexisted

[Lawrence Crowell]

This is interesting, where photons that existed at different times can be entangled.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.4191.pdf

Entanglement Between Photons that have Never Coexisted 

E. Megidish, A. Halevy, T. Shacham, T. Dvir, L. Dovrat, and H. S. Eisenberg 

Racah Institute of Physics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91904, Israel 

The role of the timing and order of quantum measurements is not just a fundamental question of quantum mechanics, but also a puzzling one. Any part of a quantum system that has finished evolving, can be measured immediately or saved for later, without affecting the final results, regardless of the continued evolution of the rest of the system. In addition, the non-locality of quantum mechanics, as manifested by entanglement, does not apply only to particles with spatial separation, but also with temporal separation. Here we demonstrate these principles by generating and fully characterizing an entangled pair of photons that never coexisted. Using entanglement swapping between two temporally separated photon pairs we entangle one photon from the first pair with another photon from the second pair. The first photon was detected even before the other was created. The observed quantum correlations manifest the non-locality of quantum mechanics in spacetime. 

[Philip Thrift]

In conclusion, we have demonstrated quantum entanglement between two photons that do not share coexistence. Although one photon is measured even before the other is created, full quantum correlations were observed by measuring the density matrix of the two photons, conditioned on the result of the projecting measurement.

A demonstration of retrocausation (retrodependency). 

@philipthrift

[Lawrence Crowell]

On Saturday, July 6, 2019 at 6:04:18 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote:

In conclusion, we have demonstrated quantum entanglement between two photons that do not share coexistence. Although one photon is measured even before the other is created, full quantum correlations were observed by measuring the density matrix of the two photons, conditioned on the result of the projecting measurement.

A demonstration of retrocausation (retrodependency). 

@philipthrift

NO!! That violates Bell's inequalities and this measurement was done with the stats that violate Bell's inequalities.

LC

[Philip Thrift]

You are completely clueless, and in addition give false information about the subject.

@philipthrift

[Eva]

@Lawrence Crowell

Very interesting, does it mean that everything is connected not only spatially but also temporarily?

@Philip Thrift

Retrocausation? So, I'm thirsty because I will drink water? This is to much for me :/

[Lawrence Crowell]

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:03:05 AM UTC-5, Eva wrote:

@Lawrence Crowell

Very interesting, does it mean that everything is connected not only spatially but also temporarily?

Sort of. The Wheeler delayed choice experiment indicates there is a time aspect to entanglement as well. Look that up on Wikipedia, and it is a bit odd. Quantum states and their entanglements are not something that exist in space or time, but which may have a representation in such. Things get a little odd with time because there is no such thing as a universal time operator. If there were it would mean the conjugate of time, which is energy, as an operator can't have a discrete spectrum. 

 

@Philip Thrift

Retrocausation? So, I'm thirsty because I will drink water? This is to much for me :/

Huw Price and Wharton have been beating this dead horse for a long time. Not many physicists take this seriously, for it would mean there is an underlying causal mechanism that would obey Bell inequalities. The Bell theorem illustrate how quantum physics violates these. The retrocauality idea is very much an auslander conjecture that not many take seriously.

LC

[Philip Thrift]

This topic has been discussed for about 20 years here, beginning in the original group.

       https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/atvoid

Some are a dense today about this as they were 20 years ago. Don't buy into the fundamentalist cult catechism (and a total misunderstanding of physics) expressed above.

 

@philip thrift

[Philip Thrift]

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:50:10 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote:

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:41:24 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:03:05 AM UTC-5, Eva wrote:

@Lawrence Crowell

Very interesting, does it mean that everything is connected not only spatially but also temporarily?

Sort of. The Wheeler delayed choice experiment indicates there is a time aspect to entanglement as well. Look that up on Wikipedia, and it is a bit odd. Quantum states and their entanglements are not something that exist in space or time, but which may have a representation in such. Things get a little odd with time because there is no such thing as a universal time operator. If there were it would mean the conjugate of time, which is energy, as an operator can't have a discrete spectrum. 

 

@Philip Thrift

Retrocausation? So, I'm thirsty because I will drink water? This is to much for me :/

Huw Price and Wharton have been beating this dead horse for a long time. Not many physicists take this seriously, for it would mean there is an underlying causal mechanism that would obey Bell inequalities. The Bell theorem illustrate how quantum physics violates these. The retrocauality idea is very much an auslander conjecture that not many take seriously.

LC

This topic has been discussed for about 20 years here, beginning in the original group.

By 'here' I meant on atvoid and atvoid-2 (the sequel), not everything-list.

But the point is this topic was discussed for 20 years, beginning in the group started by Victor Stenger (Timeless Reality). Physics does not rule backward (or downward, for that matter) causation in or out, and someone who tells you absolutely it is ruled out has no understanding of physics.

[Brent Meeker]

On 7/6/2019 4:50 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

n Saturday, July 6, 2019 at 6:04:18 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote:

In conclusion, we have demonstrated quantum entanglement between two photons that do not share coexistence. Although one photon is measured even before the other is created, full quantum correlations were observed by measuring the density matrix of the two photons, conditioned on the result of the projecting measurement.

A demonstration of retrocausation (retrodependency). 

@philipthrift

NO!! That violates Bell's inequalities and this measurement was done with the stats that violate Bell's inequalities.

LC

You mean "That would satisfy Bell's inequalities..." don't you?

Brent

[Lawrence Crowell]

I should have said violates Bell's theorem. Bell's theorem is on how QM violates classical inequalities for probabilities. Any attempt to wire up some underpinning to QM that is classical would mean quantum systems would have a hidden variable that would obey the inequalities. 

LC 

[Philip Thrift]

Locality, Independence and the Pro-Liberty Bell

https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9602020

Construed as an argument against hidden variable theories, Bell's Theorem assumes that hidden variables would be independent of future measurement settings. This Independence Assumption (IA) is rarely questioned. Bell considered relaxing it to avoid non-locality, but thought that the resulting view left no room for free will. However, Bell seems to have failed to distinguish two different strategies for giving up IA. One strategy takes for granted the Principle of the Common Cause, which requires that a correlation between hidden variables and measurement settings be explained by a joint correlation with some unknown factor in their common past. The other strategy rejects the Principle of the Common Cause, and argues that the required correlation might be due to the known interaction between the object system and the measuring device in their common future. Bell and most others who have discussed these issues have focussed on the former strategy, but because the two approaches have not been properly distinguished, it has not been well appreciated that there is a quite different way to relax IA. This paper distinguishes the two strategies, and argues that the latter is considerably more appealing than the former.

@philipthrift 

[Brent Meeker]

On 7/7/2019 6:25 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:50:10 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote:

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:41:24 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:03:05 AM UTC-5, Eva wrote:

@Lawrence Crowell

Very interesting, does it mean that everything is connected not only spatially but also temporarily?

Sort of. The Wheeler delayed choice experiment indicates there is a time aspect to entanglement as well. Look that up on Wikipedia, and it is a bit odd. Quantum states and their entanglements are not something that exist in space or time, but which may have a representation in such. Things get a little odd with time because there is no such thing as a universal time operator. If there were it would mean the conjugate of time, which is energy, as an operator can't have a discrete spectrum. 

 

@Philip Thrift

Retrocausation? So, I'm thirsty because I will drink water? This is to much for me :/

Huw Price and Wharton have been beating this dead horse for a long time. Not many physicists take this seriously, for it would mean there is an underlying causal mechanism that would obey Bell inequalities. The Bell theorem illustrate how quantum physics violates these. The retrocauality idea is very much an auslander conjecture that not many take seriously.

LC

This topic has been discussed for about 20 years here, beginning in the original group.

By 'here' I meant on atvoid and atvoid-2 (the sequel), not everything-list.

But the point is this topic was discussed for 20 years, beginning in the group started by Victor Stenger (Timeless Reality). Physics does not rule backward (or downward, for that matter) causation in or out, and someone who tells you absolutely it is ruled out has no understanding of physics.

In general it is ruled out by definition, as in classical mechanics: The past and future are all determined by any sufficient set of conditions, so when we give past conditions we say they cause the future condition and when we give the future condition we say it is caused by the past.

Brent

       https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/atvoid

Some are a dense today about this as they were 20 years ago. Don't buy into the fundamentalist cult catechism (and a total misunderstanding of physics) expressed above.

 

@philip thrift

--
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-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d8093e3a-65f8-4636-8f74-b509370597bc%40googlegroups.com.

[Philip Thrift]

On Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 7:15:17 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:

On 7/7/2019 6:25 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:

But the point is this topic was discussed for 20 years, beginning in the group started by Victor Stenger (Timeless Reality). Physics does not rule backward (or downward, for that matter) causation in or out, and someone who tells you absolutely it is ruled out has no understanding of physics.

In general it is ruled out by definition, as in classical mechanics: The past and future are all determined by any sufficient set of conditions, so when we give past conditions we say they cause the future condition and when we give the future condition we say it is caused by the past.

Brent

Entangled Time

https://www.sciencealert.com/if-you-thought-quantum-mechanics-was-weird-wait-til-you-check-out-entangled-time

In both forward and backward directions, quantum correlations span the causal void between the death of one photon and the birth of the other.

We cannot afford to ignore spatial or temporal nonlocality in future metaphysics: whether or not the boots fit, we'll have to wear 'em.

(What Would Vic (Victor Stenger) Say?)

@philipthrift

 

[Cosmin Visan]

Consciousness (and so, reality) is all about meaning reported to context. And meanings and contexts can be anything, they don't have to be spatial or temporal.