Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Tuesday February 14 2017, @12:40PM   Printer-friendly
from the for-big-values-of-weird dept.

There might be no getting around what Albert Einstein called "spooky action at a distance." With an experiment described [February 7th] in Physical Review Letters — a feat that involved harnessing starlight to control measurements of particles shot between buildings in Vienna — some of the world's leading cosmologists and quantum physicists are closing the door on an intriguing alternative to "quantum entanglement."

[...] In the first of a planned series of "cosmic Bell test" experiments, the team sent pairs of photons from the roof of [Anton] Zeilinger's lab in Vienna through the open windows of two other buildings and into optical modulators, tallying coincident detections as usual. But this time, they attempted to lower the chance that the modulator settings might somehow become correlated with the states of the photons in the moments before each measurement. They pointed a telescope out of each window, trained each telescope on a bright and conveniently located (but otherwise random) star, and, before each measurement, used the color of an incoming photon from each star to set the angle of the associated modulator. The colors of these photons were decided hundreds of years ago, when they left their stars, increasing the chance that they (and therefore the measurement settings) were independent of the states of the photons being measured.

And yet, the scientists found that the measurement outcomes still violated Bell's upper limit, boosting their confidence that the polarized photons in the experiment exhibit spooky action at a distance after all.

Source: https://www.quantamagazine.org/20170207-bell-test-quantum-loophole/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday February 14 2017, @08:06PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday February 14 2017, @08:06PM (#467083)

    I agree, AC has issues, but he's right, from the perspective of the photons. All in all, though, I don't think photons really care about this experiment or what it is showing - though their violation of Bell's upper limit does seem to show that they are far from indifferent.

    I think what the astronomers were hoping for was to establish independence in the photon sources, so whether they were emitted hundreds of years ago in our reference frame, or "just emitted" as the photon sees things, the relevant point is that they're coming from separate, uncorrelated sources.

    Too lazy to read the article, I wonder if/how they compensated for backscatter light and other non-star origin photons - some of that would be using the two separate windows as receiver points, but there would still be some commonality in the incoming light, small, but not zero.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2