When the scientists "took the photograph" of the bose-einstein condensate, measure the temperature, and manipulate the BEC to split into EPR pairs, how do they prevent "measuring" the system too early and losing the quantum effects?
They have a timing card that will measure the time between splitting the clouds and when they measure. This is basically a very fast and accurate clock that communicates with equipment to make sure that everything is in time with one another.
hmmm interesting.@@ScienceDiscussed but "splitting" the BEC (manipulating it, essentially) implies interaction between the environment (controlled by scientists) and the system, yes? can some manipulations on the system end up "measuring" the system, and others don't?
One talks about "spooky action at a distance" (Einstein) but, what if the spin is entangled in the same way each end of a see-saw are entangled? Over simplistic, if course but a Newtonian view of Quantum entanglement might be that the particles are less complicated than we have perceived them to be.
it is mentioned that interaction is necessary for two quantum systems to be entangled. What about the converse? If two quantum systems interact and they're in close proximity, does entanglement always occur?
You will not always get entanglement but there will be a probability of it occurring. Quantum measurement are often repeated many times and the average is taken of all the measurements. If this is done correctly, the measurements where no entanglement occurred are either ignored completely or have a small background effect that doesn't influence the results.
I think it would be interesting to see just how close two systems can be and how strong they can interact and still *not* be entangled@@ScienceDiscussed
@@GeoffryGifari great idea. This experiment would measure the exchange interaction length scale. This has been done before but is still a useful experiment. The best system for this would be traped ions, where they can manipulate single atoms and adjust the separation between atoms with amazing precision.
Sounds like you’re trying to make it this sound like an Apple product announcement for the atom. Not everything needs that much deference we get it, atoms are kewl and all that.
I recommend a video link as attached, then we may know why modern physics does not add up. ua-cam.com/video/Sk7ZEg68V-o/v-deo.html By the way, is time of our space moves light wave or light wave moves time of our space. If you have the right answer, then you know our theoretical physics is not correct!
When the scientists "took the photograph" of the bose-einstein condensate, measure the temperature, and manipulate the BEC to split into EPR pairs, how do they prevent "measuring" the system too early and losing the quantum effects?
Great question. Replying so I also get the answer
They have a timing card that will measure the time between splitting the clouds and when they measure. This is basically a very fast and accurate clock that communicates with equipment to make sure that everything is in time with one another.
hmmm interesting.@@ScienceDiscussed but "splitting" the BEC (manipulating it, essentially) implies interaction between the environment (controlled by scientists) and the system, yes?
can some manipulations on the system end up "measuring" the system, and others don't?
The scientists said "Smile" and two entangled paired smiled together - one bending their left chick, another bending their right.
One talks about "spooky action at a distance" (Einstein) but, what if the spin is entangled in the same way each end of a see-saw are entangled? Over simplistic, if course but a Newtonian view of Quantum entanglement might be that the particles are less complicated than we have perceived them to be.
it is mentioned that interaction is necessary for two quantum systems to be entangled. What about the converse?
If two quantum systems interact and they're in close proximity, does entanglement always occur?
You will not always get entanglement but there will be a probability of it occurring. Quantum measurement are often repeated many times and the average is taken of all the measurements. If this is done correctly, the measurements where no entanglement occurred are either ignored completely or have a small background effect that doesn't influence the results.
I think it would be interesting to see just how close two systems can be and how strong they can interact and still *not* be entangled@@ScienceDiscussed
@@GeoffryGifari great idea. This experiment would measure the exchange interaction length scale. This has been done before but is still a useful experiment. The best system for this would be traped ions, where they can manipulate single atoms and adjust the separation between atoms with amazing precision.
@@ScienceDiscussed Isn't this the famous Quantum measurement problem.
My toaster is broken and I can’t fix it.
Sounds like you’re trying to make it this sound like an Apple product announcement for the atom. Not everything needs that much deference we get it, atoms are kewl and all that.
I recommend a video link as attached, then we may know why modern physics does not add up. ua-cam.com/video/Sk7ZEg68V-o/v-deo.html By the way, is time of our space moves light wave or light wave moves time of our space. If you have the right answer, then you know our theoretical physics is not correct!
I’ll type again
It sounds like you’re trying to make an announcement for an apple product when it probably doesn’t need it
They have no idea from whom they talk!