geordief

Is AI in this context not always going to be playing catch up? Who would have imagined a blank page would be a symbol for (whatever it is understood to mean)? Will AI be writing affecting poetry next and putting our creative thinkers and communicators out of business? Or will it be doing a valiant effort at copycating what is already out of date?

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04201-6 "Did physicists create a wormhole in a quantum computer?" I was wondering what anyone here makes of this latest news as published today in Nature? Did they just simulate the transfer of information or did it really happen (both?) How might this affect the search for a theory of quantum gravity?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-63813122 This article has a good few examples for how the Chinese people are getting around the censor in the aftermath of the recent death of their former President. I wonder who will come out on top? The censors or the censorees? It has been ,I think accepted wisdom that the censor fights a losing battle ,rather like poor King Canute but the Chinese CP seems to be game for the fight Can it win ?

Would that interference be between their probability waves? It wouldn't affect their respective frequencies?(I assume they would have to be identical?)

Is there any interference? I understand different photons can have different frequencies.

Ah yes,I forgot about M's wall Perhaps I will ask that question of mine again elsewhere. So reflecting off the side of an optical fibre would not be an interaction that would cause a loss of entanglement?

Is it possible to be on both sides of the wall? Is there a medium that holds all the interactions? The field? Is that a school of thought?(or even mainstream theory?)

No ,I didn't mean for them to get captured by a BH or BHs but to get slingshotted by it or them into each others' path. Totally incredible,I know 😉

Does it follow that Saddam was not a bully? He met his end with more dignity than his executioners Or can you be a bully and still be physically brave? Was he just deluded into thinking those who did not share his allegiances did not deserve respect?

I don't think I that was what I had in mind regarding the BHs I just meant that one or both of the particles could encounter a BH along their trajectory and undergo gravitational slingshots that would take them on collision course with their entangled partner. I guess that circumstance might be impossible to prodjects uce except by chance and more or less impossible in the lifetime of our universe. So maybe not even a thought experiment. In any event any entanglement that had lasted to that point would be broken(by those last remaining objects in the universe )

Could they just meet again under the influence of gravity? Their trajectory could be altered if either or both of them went close enough to a small black hole I imagine entanglement would be lost when they met again

Any genre? Ladies in Lavender.

What do you want to know?It is a forum for exchanging thoughts and ideas mainly connected to science. Are you interested in science? Have you studied it at all?

Think I have discussed this in my last reply to MigL I see you have replied but will finish this post first before looking at it Yes thanks.I am completely ignorant of the actual mechanism of entanglement generation. I will have to bone up kn that to some extent at least in the next while.

Trying to cross my t's, don't we know they are an entangled pair if they are produced simultaneously at the same location? And ,once we know that can we track their progress? (I am not familiar with the actual process whereby a pair of entangled particles are created but I assumed it was because they arose out of a common interaction.Is it not inevitable that such pairs are entangled or are some entangled and some not?)

Thanks.I will take a look.I think Swansont's brief allusion to quantum key encryption probably contains the answer to my question Sorry,that is what I meant.....is "identifiable pair" (identifiable as a pair) I will edit that post

Thanks.I also deduce from your answer that one can indeed produce identifiable pairs** of entangled particles "to order" ** ie we know they are an entangled pair

It is not possible to produce pairs of entangled particles "to order"? The same time and location of source does not guarantee that?

It has always been my understanding(very likely ignorant or flawed) .Do you want to explain under what circumstances a "pacifist" might take up arms against an "enemy"? Perhaps in another thread as I think pacifism ,at least as I have understood it is the last thing that Ukraine needs just now.

How more specific?I don't see immediately how to be more specific. I assume you don't mean I should specify the type of particle and the particular state do you?(I had photon ×spin in mind even if I can"t claim to understand that phenomenon)

Who is saying "keep fighting"? It is "keep supporting" (Obviously a grey area but the idea that we are fighting to the last drop of Ukrainian blood is very misleading) You have already told us you are a pacifist ...good luck with that.

Suppose we have such a pair(A and B) and place detectors (not sure if more than one detector is possible or of use) along the path of particle A but do not do so along the path of particle B Is there any way to determine at which point (or between which points) particle B has any interaction? Alternatively, is there any way at all it is possible to state that there has not been any interaction (and so the particles are still entangled)? As a related (perhaps almost identical) question , is there anything at all we can say(or infer?) about the state of a particle in between observations? (I assume the answer must be "No")

Are the statistical correlations what result when the individual observations are fed into the Bell's inequality equations? And do the individual observations give a 100% accurate as predicted outcome? ie each matched pair of entangled particles exhibits inverse properties for ,for example spin? (So I quite wrong in my assumption in my previous post?)

Is this true ?Have there only been statistical observations and never a one to one observation? (I only ask to fill in this gap in my knowledge and not to buttress any pov I might have....)

You have a very good point but appeasement is a very different animal in the era of mutually assured destruction. Were it not for Ukraine's noble resistance from day one of this latest phase of Russia's aggression the West would have acquiesced in Russia's theft of nearly all if Ukraine. That would have been a policy I would have supported since the alternative was a possible nuclear exchange btw Russia and Nato. Ukraine's resistance and self assertion has reshuffled the cards but Russia is still a nuclear power led by a madman and we still have to navigate dangerous waters.