| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"SkanderH" |
| Date: |
26 Jan 2005 05:29:07 AM |
| Object: |
FTL, EPR, SR and QM |
In a recently posted topic somebody proposed that Faster Than Light
Communication was possible, and was answered that according to SR,
FTL is impossible. Moreover Einstein showed in his EPR paper that QM
must be wrong since it implied FTL signals between entangled
particles. and Bell extended this result to his famous bell's
inequality.
However didn't somebody in the 80's (Aspen or Aspect?) experimentally
verify that bell's inequality is violated, meaning that FTL is at
least in theory possible? please enlighten me!
Thanks
*-----------------------*
Posted at:
www.GroupSrv.com
*-----------------------*
.
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: FTL, EPR, SR and QM |
26 Jan 2005 08:22:27 AM |
|
|
SkanderH wrote:
In a recently posted topic somebody proposed that Faster Than Light
Communication was possible, and was answered that according to SR,
FTL is impossible. Moreover Einstein showed in his EPR paper that QM
must be wrong since it implied FTL signals between entangled
particles. and Bell extended this result to his famous bell's
inequality.
However didn't somebody in the 80's (Aspen or Aspect?) experimentally
verify that bell's inequality is violated, meaning that FTL is at
least in theory possible? please enlighten me!
Bells Inequalities
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BellsInequalities.html
Hidden Variables
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/HiddenVariables.html
Einstein lost.
Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics
Amir D Aczel
2002 John Wiley & Sons/Four Walls Eight
Windows 302pp 16.99/$28.00hb
There are two kinds of books about quantum
mechanics. There are those in which we learn
about abstract concepts such as Hilbert spaces,
state vectors and density matrixes, but where the
author never addresses - or only pays lip-service
to - the question of what quantum mechanics
actually means. This is the approach often taken in
textbooks. The other, quite opposite, approach
focuses on the interpretative question - drawing all
kinds of conclusions and analogies, talking about
telepathy and other mysteries, and perhaps even
claiming that quantum mechanics transcends
Western philosophy.
Neither approach is very helpful when one wants
to understand what quantum mechanics really
means in a deep philosophical sense. Amir Aczel's
new book on entanglement - falling as it does into
neither category - avoids such pitfalls.
Anton Zeilinger from the Institute of Experimental
Physics at the University of Vienna reviews the
book in the May issue of Physics World; email
anton.zeilin...@univie.ac.at
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
