Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday February 04 2018, @03:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the three's-a-generality dept.

In 1993, physicist Lucien Hardy proposed an experiment showing that there is a small probability (around 6-9%) of observing a particle and its antiparticle interacting with each other without annihilating—something that is impossible in classical physics. The way to explain this result is to require quantum theory to be nonlocal: that is, to allow for the existence of long-range quantum correlations, such as entanglement, so that particles can influence each other across long distances.

So far, Hardy's paradox has been experimentally demonstrated with two particles, and a few special cases with more than two particles have been proposed but not experimentally demonstrated. Now in a new paper published in Physical Review Letters, physicists have presented a generalized Hardy's paradox that extends to any number of particles. Further, they show that any version of Hardy's paradox that involves three or more particles conflicts with local (classical) theory even more strongly than any of the previous versions of the paradox do. To illustrate, the physicists proposed an experiment with three particles in which the probability of observing the paradoxical event reaches an estimated 25%.

"In this paper, we show a family of generalized Hardy's paradox to the most degree, in that by adjusting certain parameters they not only include previously known extensions as special cases, but also give sharper conflicts between quantum and classical theories in general," coauthor Jing-Ling Chen at Nankai University and the National University of Singapore told Phys.org. "What's more, based on the paradoxes, we are able to write down novel Bell's inequalities, which enable us to detect more quantum entangled states."

https://phys.org/news/2018-02-hardy-paradox-stronger-conflict-quantum.html

-- submitted from IRC


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This discussion has been archived.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 jimtheowl on Sunday February 04 2018, @10:23PM (2 children)

    by jimtheowl (5929) on Sunday February 04 2018, @10:23PM (#633042)
    Do you mean the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem?

    Do you think it does?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Bobs on Sunday February 04 2018, @11:05PM (1 child)

    by Bobs (1462) on Sunday February 04 2018, @11:05PM (#633054)

    I think maybe it does, and maybe it doesn’t.
    You may think that the two alternatives would
    cancel each other out, but it turns out they don’t.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by jimtheowl on Monday February 05 2018, @12:01AM

      by jimtheowl (5929) on Monday February 05 2018, @12:01AM (#633072)
      By "two alternatives" do you mean matter and anti-matter? They are not alternatives, as, they can both exist. They just can't be put together without annihilating each other. By cancel each other out, do you mean that they should exist in the same quantities? And by "you would think they cancel each other out" of course that is not the case, because the Universe would not exist. So in that context, I supposed that the proposed experiment could provide insight in some of the observed asymmetry of the Universe, yes. I doubt that it will provide a full explanation.