Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: Quantum mystics
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:06:10 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <v4aajh$173n5$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v44t6u$3n7fn$1@dont-email.me> <v4651b$1ejef$1@solani.org>
 <gm2e6jdple0j6iuskqjkig5vfcqruq7pj4@4ax.com> <v4799p$h5qj$2@dont-email.me>
 <v47d37$hnfj$2@dont-email.me> <v47gh8$isp6$1@dont-email.me>
 <v47qa7$ko5c$1@dont-email.me> <7lre6j5fibf2cht90dkedmftlej4rlmgr6@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:04:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1443e1549f23979441424df84ab651dc";
	logging-data="1281765"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/X4apNkKfrEdU+GpoQrkKe"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NTihWaSomU7v0FFmvPrOGt1zFtQ=
In-Reply-To: <7lre6j5fibf2cht90dkedmftlej4rlmgr6@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3298

On 6/10/24 23:24, john larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:15:51 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/10/24 20:26, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>>
>> [Snip...]
>>
>>>
>>> Sticking with the semiclassical picture of photodetection is good, because
>>> it avoids almost all of the blunders made by the photons-as-billiard-balls
>>> folk, but it doesn’t get you out of the mystery.
>>>
>>> The really mysterious thing about photodetection is that a given photon (*)
>>>
>>> incident on a large lossless detector gives rise to exactly one detection
>>> event, with probability spatialy and temporally weighted by E**2.
>>>
>>> Doesn’t seem so bad yet, but consider this:
>>> If the detector is large compared with the pulse width/c, distant points on
>>> the detector are separated by a spacelike interval.
>>>
>>> That means that so when point A detects it, there is no way for the
>>> information reach point B before the end of the pulse, when E drops to
>>> zero, and yet experimentally point B doesn’t detect it.
>>>
>>> (*) a quantized excitation of a harmonic oscillator mode of the EM field in
>>> a given set of boundary conditions)
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Phil Hobbs
>>
>> We don't have single-photon-on-demand sources, nor perfect detectors.
>> Both sources and detectors are probabilistic. I'd like to see how
>> this argument fares using energy resolving detectors like TESs.
>>
>> I do not expect the probability of a detection event in one spot to
>> be affected instantly by a detection event somewhere else. The
>> collapse of the wave function is an attempt to apply statistical
>> reasoning to a single event.
>>
>> Jeroen Belleman
> 
> Higher energy photons, like gamma rays, can be detected with 100%
> probability. They pack a lot of energy.
> 

Yes, but you'd need to use quite dense stuff to have a good
chance of intercepting it. Lead tungstate is the thing these
days.

Jeroen Belleman