Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:59:44 +0000
From: john larkin <jl@650pot.com>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: Quantum mystics
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:59:44 -0700
Message-ID: <hvie6j9qflq9giv87lk9jqb3bqihp0s18j@4ax.com>
References: <v44t6u$3n7fn$1@dont-email.me> <v4651b$1ejef$1@solani.org> <gm2e6jdple0j6iuskqjkig5vfcqruq7pj4@4ax.com> <v4799p$h5qj$2@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 83
X-Trace: sv3-4ju+urSXpnP2wCebz1APu7HO+TOLBWtbK+OC7xEiiwlnOTLnYtXDf1+TGmBj4WBw//Z7EzmR7d9kvNW!PSy+RI9LUpEPJCKAvoHj5s08+4ne763D0emm8Junv5fEgzC7N99IanrulcwyYZYBUylOkrWWL2WJ!deoH8w==
X-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/abuse.html
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4809

On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:25:30 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

>On 6/10/24 16:20, john larkin wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:04:27 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On a sunny day (Sun, 9 Jun 2024 20:46:53 +0200) it happened Jeroen Belleman
>>> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <v44t6u$3n7fn$1@dont-email.me>:
>>>
>>>> I just watched a talk by Anton Zeilinger, professor of physics
>>>> at the university of Vienna, and 2022 Nobel laureate, about
>>>> quantum effects and entanglement.
>>>>
>>>> I feel a rant bubbling up!
>>>>
>>>> The guy is a mystic, a fraud! He pretended to demonstrate that
>>>> light consists of particles by showing a little box that starts
>>>> clicking, like a Geiger counter, when exposed to light. Even if
>>>> the little box really did detect light, that means nothing! Light
>>>> *detection* is quantized, yes, but that does not imply that light
>>>> itself is so too.
>>>>
>>>> He attempted to convince the public that entanglement means that
>>>> the results of measurements made at two remote places come out
>>>> identically, and without any time delay. That's just not true,
>>>> but he didn't even give a hint of how this really works. He did
>>>> not mention that you have to make *correlated* measurements to
>>>> detect entanglement. For that, you need to communicate *what*
>>>> measurement is to be made at each location, and that implies
>>>> that you either prescribe the exact measurement in advance or
>>>> select a subset of the results after the fact. Either way, this
>>>> skews the data.
>>>>
>>>> He's in it for the money and the fame. Grrr. And he's one of
>>>> many, too.
>>>>
>>>> Jeroen Belleman
>>>
>>> Agreed, so much quantum crap, almost like glowball worming sales...
>>> Perfessors, Albert the stone counter..
>>> This is nice and came close to the space filled with a fluid paper you gave a link to:
>>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/06/240606152154.htm
>>>   it is likely not 100% correct, but a fluid of femtoscopic black holes?
>>>
>>> In my school days I came across cases that were obviously wrong,
>>> I declined arguing with the teacher in the days before the exams..
>>>
>>> Entanglement
>>> Imagine you on the beach.
>>> You put a ball in the water, and a few meters away somebody else does the same.
>>> Mysteriously both balls go up and down at the same moment,
>>> 'entangled'
>>> Wave crashing on the beach.
>>> There was an experiment recently where they had 2 detectors in the lab, meters away,
>>> connected by a mile of fiber.
>>> Photons were entangled...
>>> Well , in that beach experiment you can tie a wire a mile long between the balls and they still go up and down the same time.
>>>
>>> This is simplified, but the detection is then indeed quantified.
>>> I like to play with PMTs etc, do those perfessors know ANYTHING about the equipment they use?
>>> Or even DESIGNED anything ?
>> 
>> But photon entanglement can't be explained, or even thought about, in
>> classic-physics terms.
>> 
>> Nor can single-photon interferance.
>> 
>> Just accept and enjoy it.
>> 
>
>That's false! Entanglement and interference can easily be understood
>in terms of waves and quantized detectors. It's the QM view, with its
>imagined photon particle flying everywhere at once that is confusing.
>
>What size do you imagine a photon to be?

It's unlimited. You can have an interferometer with different arm
lengths and still get single-photon interferance.

I noticed that on a lithium niobate Mach-Zender e/o modulator. The
interfering path lengths are different by thousands of wavelengths.