DOCSLIB.ORG

Conference Manuscript Boris Podolsky

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conference Manuscript Boris Podolsky Xavier University Exhibit Conference on the Foundations of Quantum Journals, Publications, Conferences, and Mechanics (1962) Proceedings 2002 Conference Manuscript Boris Podolsky John B. Hart Xavier University - Cincinnati Frederick G. Werner Follow this and additional works at: http://www.exhibit.xavier.edu/conf_qm_1962 Recommended Citation Podolsky, Boris; Hart, John B.; and Werner, Frederick G., "Conference Manuscript" (2002). Conference on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1962). Book 1. http://www.exhibit.xavier.edu/conf_qm_1962/1 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals, Publications, Conferences, and Proceedings at Exhibit. It has been accepted for inclusion in Conference on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1962) by an authorized administrator of Exhibit. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONFERENCE ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS Xavier University Cincinnati 7, Ohio October 1-5, 1962 Chairman Boris Podolsky Conference Manager John B. Hart Assistant Chairman Frederick G. Werner Sponsored jointly by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Office of Naval Research, and the Judge Robert S. Marx Foundation. Copyright © , 1962, by Xavier University, Ohio This is a limited edition of the conference manuscript to be used for editing by the conferees. Roster of Limited-Attendance Portion of Conference Main Participants Professor Y. Aharonov Professor Boris Podolsky Yeshiva University Xavier University Professor P. A. M. Dirac Professor Nathan Rosen Cambridge University (England) Technion, Haifa, Israel Professor Wendell H. Furry Professor Eugene P. Wigner Harvard University Princeton University Limited-Attendance Group Dr. William Band Dr. Eugen Merzbacher Washington State University University of North Carolina Dr. Dieter R. Brill Dr. Jack Rivers Yale University University of Missouri Dr. Gideon Carmi Dr. O. von Roos Yeshiva University Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Dr. Harold Glaser Technology Office of Naval Research Dr. Solomon L. Schwebel Dr. Eugene Guth University of Cincinnati Oak Ridge National Laboratory Dr. Abner Shimony Dr. Arno Jaeger M. I. T. University of Cincinnati Dr. Jack A. Soules Dr. Kaiser S. Kunz Office of Naval Research New Mexico State University Dr. Frederick G. Werner Dr. Michael M. Yanase, S. J. Xavier University Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N. J. Director of audio-visual recording: Mr. Thomas Fischer Assisted by: Robert Podolsky Austin Towle CONFERENCE ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS October 1-5, 1962 Public Relations Policy In order that each participant may feel free to express himself spontaneously in the spirit of the limited attendance portion of this conference, the chairman has adopted the following policy regarding references. It is understood that each person present, before referring in publication to remarks made by a participant during these sessions is expected to check such material with the participant or participants concerned. Reports of general conclusions are to be checked with the chairman. This policy applies as well to the published report of the proceedings, which is to be edited by the chairman. Dr. Podolsky: In the heat of an argument I can make a statement, and I probably will, which any freshman with a pencil and paper and five minutes can prove to be nonsense. Perhaps a few minutes later I might regret having made the statement. Now, we don't want such statements to get out. The principle reason for this is to make sure the participants won't stop to worry about whether or not what they're saying is really so, or whether it is nonsense. We want the participants to feel free to express themselves spontaneously, and afterwards, in more sober discussions, withdraw these statements without things getting out in the newspapers. MON-A.M. Conference - October 1-5, 1962 Part of Monday Morning Session after introductions: Podolsky: You probably have seen in the newspapers some reference to quantum-mechanical action at a distance. The idea of that occurred to me and probably has occurred to many other people. I would like sometime to have a discussion on this subject. Aharonov and Bohm suggested an experiment which was, as you know, performed by Mölllenstedt, and which can be interpreted in two ways. One is that the vector potential has physical significance. That was the way in which they presented it. But if you consider the fact that the observed phase shift in the wave function actually turns out to be proportional to the flux, which is gauge invariant, one might interpret the result of the experiment in a different way, namely, that the reason we have the shift is quantum-mechanical action at a distance. The fact that flux through a loop formed by the two electron beams actually affects the wave function of these two electron beams and produces the observed phase shift at the place where the flux is not, will be an example of an action at a distance. N ow if this experiment was alone it would not convince me that there is such an action at a distance, because then it would be simplest to say that a vector potential has a direct effect. But there is this old question, sometimes referred to as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, where also we have a kind of action at a distance. You are all probably familiar with that. I have discussed this question of quantum-mechanical action at a distance with several people and one of them said "Well, of course, in all the quantum-mechanical effects there is action at a distance." For example: when you take the so-called reduction of a wave packet and the wave function suddenly changes from one thing to something quite different, there is again a kind of action at a distance, I would like expressions of opinion about this question of action at a distance. MON-A.M. -2- Aharonov: It is clear that this action at a distance is never observable in the usual sense. The usual statement about observation involves probabilistic statements, and it is clearly the case that in all the other examples that you mention about action at a distance there will be a change in a particular case, but not a probabilistic change in an ensemble of cases. Podolsky: But what about the Aharonov-Bohm experiment? Aharonov: Well, in that case there is a change in probabilities too, of course, because that is what we observe in the experiment. But one can in that particular case discuss a local action which involves an interaction with potentials. You wanted to strengthen the idea of action at a distance by discussing other examples, but I am not aware of any other example of action at a distance that will involve change in probabilities and not only in information. In one particular case, namely, in the case of ensembles, there is no change in probabilities after so-called action at a distance. Podolsky: What about the experiment of Wu and Shaknov? Aharonov: Well, this case is exactly similar to any other example of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. That is to say: in any individual case, when you make an experiment on one of the particles that are involved in the setup of the paradox, you learn something about the state of the other particle. In that sense, you have made a change in the wave function of the total system, and also of the particle that is far away. So you can predict something about the probabilities of an experiment that will be made on the other particle. But if you consider an ensemble of similar experiments, you ask whether your measurements of the first particle in each pair of particles that appear in his ensemble will cause changes in probability of the second particle in the ensemble. This means -3- MON-A.M. that the observer that makes experiments on the second particle (all the members that are called second particle in the ensemble of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen pairs) will never be able to discover that the experiment was done on the first particle. On the other hand, this action at a distance cannot send any information, or any change of probabilities to the faraway members. In other words, there is a transformation of knowledge but not of probabilities from one side to the other. Podolsky: That makes the wave function purely a subjective entity. That this isn't a subjective thing is shown by the fact that in a measurement when there is a transformation of knowledge, the wave function changes completely, while no other change occurs. (A brief discussion here continues about the question whether the change is complete or if only a partial change occurs in the wave function). Wigner: Well, it is true that under certain conditions the change in the wave function is complete. Anyway, it does not matter whether it is a knowledge? Wigner: No. Furry: By introduction of means of measurement, one could introduce a statistical situation which, from the point of view of the coordinates of the particle to be measured, is a mixed state. This mixed state is just the same thing as the classical Gibbs ensemble. I did not say it difficulty, as in the case of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen, that the ensemble MON-A.M. -4- can be interpreted from many points of view. When I said the Gibbs ensemble, it implies a realistic interpretation. This realistic interpretation is valid only in the usual laboratory set-up, when one is interested in measuring something that has non-uniform distribution over the possible to interpret it in many different ways. This is, in a sense, an artificial situation, but the theory has to deal also with artificial situations. Well, it just seems to me that the problem is perhaps the wholeness of the quantum state, and the quantum state may have this character as a whole extending over a very large distance.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elementary Explanation of the Inexistence of Decoherence at Zero
    Elementary explanation of the inexistence of decoherence at zero temperature for systems with purely elastic scattering Yoseph Imry Dept. of Condensed-Matter Physics, the Weizmann Institute of science, Rehovot 76100, Israel (Dated: October 31, 2018) This note has no new results and is therefore not intended to be submitted to a ”research” journal in the foreseeable future, but to be available to the numerous individuals who are interested in this issue. Several of those have approached the author for his opinion, which is summarized here in a hopefully pedagogical manner, for convenience. It is demonstrated, using essentially only energy conservation and elementary quantum mechanics, that true decoherence by a normal environment approaching the zero-temperature limit is impossible for a test particle which can not give or lose energy. Prime examples are: Bragg scattering, the M¨ossbauer effect and related phenomena at zero temperature, as well as quantum corrections for the transport of conduction electrons in solids. The last example is valid within the scattering formulation for the transport. Similar statements apply also to interference properties in equilibrium. PACS numbers: 73.23.Hk, 73.20.Dx ,72.15.Qm, 73.21.La I. INTRODUCTION cally in the case of the coupling of a conduction-electron in a solid to lattice vibrations (phonons) 14 years ago [5] and immediately refuted vigorously [6]. Interest in this What diminishes the interference of, say, two waves problem has resurfaced due to experiments by Mohanty (see Eq. 1 below) is an interesting fundamental ques- et al [7] which determine the dephasing rate of conduc- tion, some aspects of which are, surprisingly, still being tion electrons by weak-localization magnetoconductance debated.
    [Show full text]
  • Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will Yakir Aharonov Chapman University, [email protected]
    Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons Mathematics, Physics, and Computer Science Science and Technology Faculty Articles and Faculty Articles and Research Research 2016 Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will Yakir Aharonov Chapman University, [email protected] Eliahu Cohen Tel Aviv University Tomer Shushi University of Haifa Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/scs_articles Part of the Quantum Physics Commons Recommended Citation Aharonov, Y., Cohen, E., & Shushi, T. (2016). Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will. Quanta, 5(1), 53-60. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.12743/quanta.v5i1.44 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Science and Technology Faculty Articles and Research at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mathematics, Physics, and Computer Science Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will Comments This article was originally published in Quanta, volume 5, issue 1, in 2016. DOI: 10.12743/quanta.v5i1.44 Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/scs_articles/334 Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will Yakir Aharonov 1;2, Eliahu Cohen 1;3 & Tomer Shushi 4 1 School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Schmid College of Science, Chapman University, Orange, California, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 3 H. H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Phase from Aharonov-Bohm to Pancharatnam–Berry and Beyond
    Geometric phase from Aharonov-Bohm to Pancharatnam–Berry and beyond Eliahu Cohen1,2,*, Hugo Larocque1, Frédéric Bouchard1, Farshad Nejadsattari1, Yuval Gefen3, Ebrahim Karimi1,* 1Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada 2Faculty of Engineering and the Institute of Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel 3Department of Condensed Matter Physics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel *Corresponding authors: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: Whenever a quantum system undergoes a cycle governed by a slow change of parameters, it acquires a phase factor: the geometric phase. Its most common formulations are known as the Aharonov-Bohm, Pancharatnam and Berry phases, but both prior and later manifestations exist. Though traditionally attributed to the foundations of quantum mechanics, the geometric phase has been generalized and became increasingly influential in many areas from condensed-matter physics and optics to high energy and particle physics and from fluid mechanics to gravity and cosmology. Interestingly, the geometric phase also offers unique opportunities for quantum information and computation. In this Review we first introduce the Aharonov-Bohm effect as an important realization of the geometric phase. Then we discuss in detail the broader meaning, consequences and realizations of the geometric phase emphasizing the most important mathematical methods and experimental techniques used in the study of geometric phase, in particular those related to recent works in optics and condensed-matter physics. Published in Nature Reviews Physics 1, 437–449 (2019). DOI: 10.1038/s42254-019-0071-1 1. Introduction A charged quantum particle is moving through space.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report to Industry Canada Covering The
    Annual Report to Industry Canada Covering the Objectives, Activities and Finances for the period August 1, 2008 to July 31, 2009 and Statement of Objectives for Next Year and the Future Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics 31 Caroline Street North Waterloo, Ontario N2L 2Y5 Table of Contents Pages Period A. August 1, 2008 to July 31, 2009 Objectives, Activities and Finances 2-52 Statement of Objectives, Introduction Objectives 1-12 with Related Activities and Achievements Financial Statements, Expenditures, Criteria and Investment Strategy Period B. August 1, 2009 and Beyond Statement of Objectives for Next Year and Future 53-54 1 Statement of Objectives Introduction In 2008-9, the Institute achieved many important objectives of its mandate, which is to advance pure research in specific areas of theoretical physics, and to provide high quality outreach programs that educate and inspire the Canadian public, particularly young people, about the importance of basic research, discovery and innovation. Full details are provided in the body of the report below, but it is worth highlighting several major milestones. These include: In October 2008, Prof. Neil Turok officially became Director of Perimeter Institute. Dr. Turok brings outstanding credentials both as a scientist and as a visionary leader, with the ability and ambition to position PI among the best theoretical physics research institutes in the world. Throughout the last year, Perimeter Institute‘s growing reputation and targeted recruitment activities led to an increased number of scientific visitors, and rapid growth of its research community. Chart 1. Growth of PI scientific staff and associated researchers since inception, 2001-2009.
    [Show full text]
  • David Bohn, Roger Penrose, and the Search for Non-Local Causality
    David Bohm, Roger Penrose, and the Search for Non-local Causality Before they met, David Bohm and Roger Penrose each puzzled over the paradox of the arrow of time. After they met, the case for projective physical space became clearer. *** A machine makes pairs (I like to think of them as shoes); one of the pair goes into storage before anyone can look at it, and the other is sent down a long, long hallway. At the end of the hallway, a physicist examines the shoe.1 If the physicist finds a left hiking boot, he expects that a right hiking boot must have been placed in the storage bin previously, and upon later examination he finds that to be the case. So far, so good. The problem begins when it is discovered that the machine can make three types of shoes: hiking boots, tennis sneakers, and women’s pumps. Now the physicist at the end of the long hallway can randomly choose one of three templates, a metal sheet with a hole in it shaped like one of the three types of shoes. The physicist rolls dice to determine which of the templates to hold up; he rolls the dice after both shoes are out of the machine, one in storage and the other having started down the long hallway. Amazingly, two out of three times, the random choice is correct, and the shoe passes through the hole in the template. There can 1 This rendition of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen, 1935, delayed-choice thought experiment is paraphrased from Bernard d’Espagnat, 1981, with modifications via P.
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Quantum Spin Correlations of Relativistic Electron Pairs
    Study of quantum spin correlations of relativistic electron pairs Project status Nov. 2015 Jacek Ciborowski Marta Włodarczyk, Michał Drągowski, Artem Poliszczuk (UW) Joachim Enders, Yuliya Fritsche (TU Darmstadt) Warszawa 20.XI.2015 Quantum spin correlations In this exp: e1,e2 – electrons under study a, b - directions of spin projections (+- ½) 4 combinations for e1 and e2: ++, --, +-, -+ Probabilities: P++ , P+- , P-+ , P- - (ΣP=1) Correlation function : C = P++ + P-- - P-+ - P-+ Historical perspective • Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) paradox (1935): QM is not a complete local realistic theory • Bohm & Aharonov formulation involving spin correlations (1957) • Bell inequalities (1964) a local realistic theory must obey a class of inequalities • practical approach to Bell’s inequalities: counting aacoincidences to measure correlations The EPR paradox Boris Podolsky Nathan Rosen Albert Einstein (1896-1966) (1909-1995) (1979-1955) A. Afriat and F. Selleri, The Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen Paradox (Plenum Press, New York and London, 1999) Bohm’s version with the spin Two spin-1/2 fermions in a singlet state: E.g. if spin projection of 1 on Z axis is measured 1/2 spin projection of 2 must be -1/2 All projections should be elements of reality (QM predicts that only S2 and David Bohm (1917-1992) Sz can be determined) Hidden variables? ”Quantum Theory” (1951) Phys. Rev. 85(1952)166,180 The Bell inequalities J.S.Bell: Impossible to reconcile the concept of hidden variables with statistical predictions of QM If local realism quantum correlations
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Eraser
    Quantum Eraser March 18, 2015 It was in 1935 that Albert Einstein, with his collaborators Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen, exploiting the bizarre property of quantum entanglement (not yet known under that name which was coined in Schrödinger (1935)), noted that QM demands that systems maintain a variety of ‘correlational properties’ amongst their parts no matter how far the parts might be sepa- rated from each other (see 1935, the source of what has become known as the EPR paradox). In itself there appears to be nothing strange in this; such cor- relational properties are common in classical physics no less than in ordinary experience. Consider two qualitatively identical billiard balls approaching each other with equal but opposite velocities. The total momentum is zero. After they collide and rebound, measurement of the velocity of one ball will naturally reveal the velocity of the other. But the EPR argument coupled this observation with the orthodox Copen- hagen interpretation of QM, which states that until a measurement of a par- ticular property is made on a system, that system cannot, in general, be said to possess any definite value of that property. It is easy to see that if dis- tant correlations are preserved through measurement processes that ‘bring into being’ the measured values there is a prima facie conflict between the Copenhagen interpretation and the relativistic stricture that no information can be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Suppose, for example, we have a system with some property which is anti-correlated (in real cases, this property could be spin).
    [Show full text]
  • Required Readings
    HPS/PHIL 93872 Spring 2006 Historical Foundations of the Quantum Theory Don Howard, Instructor Required Readings: Topic: Readings: Planck and black-body radiation. Martin Klein. “Planck, Entropy, and Quanta, 19011906.” The Natural Philosopher 1 (1963), 83-108. Martin Klein. “Einstein’s First Paper on Quanta.” The Natural Einstein and the photo-electric effect. Philosopher 2 (1963), 59-86. Max Jammer. “Regularities in Line Spectra”; “Bohr’s Theory The Bohr model of the atom and spectral of the Hydrogen Atom.” In The Conceptual Development of series. Quantum Mechanics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966, pp. 62- 88. The Bohr-Sommerfeld “old” quantum Max Jammer. “The Older Quantum Theory.” In The Conceptual theory; Einstein on transition Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York: McGraw-Hill, probabilities. 1966, pp. 89-156. The Bohr-Kramers-Slater theory. Max Jammer. “The Transition to Quantum Mechanics.” In The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966, pp. 157-195. Bose-Einstein statistics. Don Howard. “‘Nicht sein kann was nicht sein darf,’ or the Prehistory of EPR, 1909-1935: Einstein’s Early Worries about the Quantum Mechanics of Composite Systems.” In Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainty: Historical, Philosophical, and Physical Inquiries into the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Arthur Miller, ed. New York: Plenum, 1990, pp. 61-111. Max Jammer. “The Formation of Quantum Mechanics.” In The Schrödinger and wave mechanics; Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Heisenberg and matrix mechanics. McGraw-Hill, 1966, pp. 196-280. James T. Cushing. “Early Attempts at Causal Theories: A De Broglie and the origins of pilot-wave Stillborn Program.” In Quantum Mechanics: Historical theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Solitons and Quantum Behavior Abstract
    Solitons and Quantum Behavior Richard A. Pakula email: [email protected] April 9, 2017 Abstract In applied physics and in engineering intuitive understanding is a boost for creativity and almost a necessity for efficient product improvement. The existence of soliton solutions to the quantum equations in the presence of self-interactions allows us to draw an intuitive picture of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this work is to compile a collection of models, some of which are simple, some are obvious, some have already appeared in papers and even in textbooks, and some are new. However this is the first time they are presented (to our knowledge) in a common place attempting to provide an intuitive physical description for one of the basic particles in nature: the electron. The soliton model applied to the electrons can be extended to the electromagnetic field providing an unambiguous description for the photon. In so doing a clear image of quantum mechanics emerges, including quantum optics, QED and field quantization. To our belief this description is of highly pedagogical value. We start with a traditional description of the old quantum mechanics, first quantization and second quantization, showing the tendency to renounce to 'visualizability', as proposed by Heisenberg for the quantum theory. We describe an intuitive description of first and second quantization based on the concept of solitons, pioneered by the 'double solution' of de Broglie in 1927. Many aspects of first and second quantization are clarified and visualized intuitively, including the possible achievement of ergodicity by the so called ‘vacuum fluctuations’. PACS: 01.70.+w, +w, 03.65.Ge , 03.65.Pm, 03.65.Ta, 11.15.-q, 12.20.*, 14.60.Cd, 14.70.-e, 14.70.Bh, 14.70.Fm, 14.70.Hp, 14.80.Bn, 32.80.y, 42.50.Lc 1 Table of Contents Solitons and Quantum Behavior ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Superoscillations.Pdf
    When the Whole Vibrates Faster than Any of its Parts Computational Superoscillation Theory Nicholas Wheeler December 2017 Introduction. The phenomenon/theory of “superoscillations”—brought to my attention by my friend Ahmed Sebbar1—originated in the time-symmetric formulation of quantum mechanics2 that gave rise to the theory of “weak measurements.” Recognition of the role that superoscillations play in that work was brought into explicit focus by Aharonov et al in 1990, and since that date the concept has found application to a remarkable variety of physical subject areas. Yakir Aharonov took his PhD in 1960 from the University of Bristol, where he worked with David Bohm.3 In 1992 a conference was convened at Bristol to celebrate Aharonov’s 60th birthday. It was on that occasion that the superoscillation phenomenon came first to the attention of Michael Berry (of the Bristol faculty), who in an essay “Faster than Fourier” contributed to the proceedings of that conference4 wrote that “He [Aharonov] told me that it is possible for functions to oscillate faster than any of their Fourier components. This seemed unbelievable, even paradoxical; I had heard nothing like it before. ” Berry was inspired to write a series of papers relating to the theory of superoscillation and its potential applications, as also by now have a great many other authors. 1 Private communication, 17 November 2017. 2 Y. Aharonov, P. G. Bergmann & J. L. Libowitz, “Time symmetry in the quantum meassurement process,” Phys. Rev. B 134, 1410–1416 (1964). 3 It was, I suspect, at the invitation of E. P Gross—who had collaborated with Bohm when both were at Princeton—that Aharonov spent 1960–1961 at Brandeis University, from which I had taken the first PhD and departed to Utrecht/CERN in February of 1960, so we never met.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Simha Jamieson, Alexander M.; Otterness, Ivan; Utracki, Leszek A
    NRC Publications Archive Archives des publications du CNRC Robert Simha Jamieson, Alexander M.; Otterness, Ivan; Utracki, Leszek A. This publication could be one of several versions: author’s original, accepted manuscript or the publisher’s version. / La version de cette publication peut être l’une des suivantes : la version prépublication de l’auteur, la version acceptée du manuscrit ou la version de l’éditeur. For the publisher’s version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l’éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous. Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3047699 Physics Today, 61, 12, p. 69, 2008-12-01 NRC Publications Record / Notice d'Archives des publications de CNRC: https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=d1535643-a1df-480c-967a-d5d7f2740786 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=d1535643-a1df-480c-967a-d5d7f2740786 Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE. L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB. Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at [email protected]. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information. Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider.
    [Show full text]
  • A WORLD WITHOUT CAUSE and EFFECT Logic-Defying Experiments Into Quantum Causality Scramble the Notion of Time Itself
    A WORLD WITHOUT CAUSE AND EFFECT Logic-defying experiments into quantum causality scramble the notion of time itself. BY PHILIP BALL lbert Einstein is heading out for his This finding1 in 2015 made the quantum the constraints of a predefined causal structure daily stroll and has to pass through world seem even stranger than scientists had might solve some problems faster than con- Atwo doorways. First he walks through thought. Walther’s experiments mash up cau- ventional quantum computers,” says quantum the green door, and then through the red one. sality: the idea that one thing leads to another. theorist Giulio Chiribella of the University of Or wait — did he go through the red first and It is as if the physicists have scrambled the con- Hong Kong. then the green? It must have been one or the cept of time itself, so that it seems to run in two What’s more, thinking about the ‘causal struc- other. The events had have to happened in a directions at once. ture’ of quantum mechanics — which events EDGAR BĄK BY ILLUSTRATION sequence, right? In everyday language, that sounds nonsen- precede or succeed others — might prove to be Not if Einstein were riding on one of the sical. But within the mathematical formalism more productive, and ultimately more intuitive, photons ricocheting through Philip Walther’s of quantum theory, ambiguity about causation than couching it in the typical mind-bending lab at the University of Vienna. Walther’s group emerges in a perfectly logical and consistent language that describes photons as being both has shown that it is impossible to say in which way.
    [Show full text]