home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.physics.research      Current physics research. (Moderated)      17,516 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 16,011 of 17,516   
   SEKI to Steven Carlip   
   Re: A Hypothesis concerning Bell's Inequ   
   15 Feb 18 12:56:31   
   
   From: seki.hajime01@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 3:52:38 PM UTC+9, Steven Carlip wrote:   
   >   
   > Experimental tests of Bell's inequality have been performed in   
   > which the experimental settings are changed randomly *after*   
   > the photons have been emitted.  I'm afraid your proposal is   
   > ruled out by observation.   
   >   
   > See   
   > Aktas et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 220404 (2015), arXiv:1504.08332   
   > Handsteiner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 060401 (2017),   
   > 	arXiv:1611.06985   
   >   
      
   Though the results of the above-cited experiments are significant,   
   I still cannot consider photon entanglement to be possible.   
      
   As I wrote a number of times;   
   - Photon entanglement postulates two-photon state, whose quantum   
     wave, if actually present, is to swell at twice the speed of light,   
     and is to metamorphose instantaneously.   
   - No or, at most, negligible interaction is possible between photons.   
   - No restriction is imposed on superposition of quantum waves of   
     photons, which are bosons.   
      
   How can photon entanglement be possible without invisible hand of God?   
      
   Then, I come up with the following additional assumption.   
   (4) The transmission characteristics of a polarizer are significantly   
       dependent on the state of zero-point oscillations around it.   
      
   If the experimental settings are changed after a photon-pair emission,   
   when a photon reaches a polarizer, the state of zero-point oscillations   
   around it is different from that in case where the experimental   
   settings have been the same as those after the change since the   
   beginning. So, because of assumption (4), violation of Bell's   
   inequality can be considered to be possible without entanglement.   
      
   Though you may feel the above argument is so expedient, I consider it   
   to be far less inconceivable and less weird than the concept of photon   
   entanglement.   
      
   Thank you very much for bringing up a valuable point.   
      
   SEKI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca