If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Medium)   Scientists prove time 'emerges' from quantum entanglement--just like money 'emerges' from ATM 'time' machines   (medium.com) divider line 58
    More: Cool, quantum, quantum entanglements, emergent phenomenon, self-energy, modern physics, quantum mechanics, general relativity, physicists  
•       •       •

2818 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Oct 2013 at 12:59 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



58 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-23 01:04:21 PM  
So,,,  A bit less 'wibbly wobbly', then?

Seriously, it's neat how well this meshes in with the only decent theoretical model of a universe that allows propagation of information forward and backward through time that I have ever seen, James P. Hogan's 'Thrice Upon a Time'.

Anyone interested in discussing time travel on a serious basis really should read that one.
 
2013-10-23 01:05:20 PM  
Or, how atheists and theists may emerge on this thread and ruin it?
 
rpm
2013-10-23 01:09:35 PM  
If time is an emergent property, what is c and why is it constant?
 
2013-10-23 01:09:49 PM  
Attentions theists, deists, etc. Just because the article and experiment mention an "outside observer" does not prove that there is one; it's a construct to prove or disprove parts of the experiment.
 
2013-10-23 01:14:19 PM  
"The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare."

Keep typing, you're almost making sense...
 
2013-10-23 01:16:03 PM  
So if I'm reading this right, and I'm pretty sure I am, the article claims we are actually the Locust, right?
 
2013-10-23 01:19:30 PM  
FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.
 
2013-10-23 01:23:27 PM  
Scientists never prove anything.
 
2013-10-23 01:32:19 PM  

honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.


So do you not know what the phrase experimental results means?
 
rpm
2013-10-23 01:34:27 PM  

honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.


Why only at first? It was proposed in 1983. Experimental verification is pretty damn cool, especially if it can be replicated.
 
2013-10-23 01:35:09 PM  
So ... to an outside observer, is this the extra-universal equivalent of a watched pot never boiling?
 
2013-10-23 01:35:51 PM  

Leader O'Cola: Scientists never prove anything.


www.seoboy.com
 
rpm
2013-10-23 01:40:54 PM  

Ego edo infantia cattus: Leader O'Cola: Scientists never prove anything.

[www.seoboy.com image 300x195]


He's right they don't. They demonstrate and disprove.
 
2013-10-23 01:43:46 PM  
Everyone knows ATMs aren't time machines.

Credit cards are time machines.  How else can I spend future money before it actually exists?
 
2013-10-23 01:45:05 PM  
Just as long as they can bring Tasha back.

scifiempire.net
 
2013-10-23 01:54:30 PM  

Egoy3k: honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.

So do you not know what the phrase experimental results means?


rpm: honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.

Why only at first? It was proposed in 1983. Experimental verification is pretty damn cool, especially if it can be replicated.

cyclonefanatic.com

 
2013-10-23 01:56:13 PM  

ampoliros: Attentions theists, deists, etc. Just because the article and experiment mention an "outside observer" does not prove that there is one; it's a construct to prove or disprove parts of the experiment.


However it does mesh very neatly with the ancient argument that to God all time is simultaneous.
 
2013-10-23 02:02:31 PM  

Smoky Dragon Dish: Egoy3k: honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.

So do you not know what the phrase experimental results means?

rpm: honk: FTFA: "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first exprimental results to prove it"

I was really impressed at first.

Why only at first? It was proposed in 1983. Experimental verification is pretty damn cool, especially if it can be replicated.

[cyclonefanatic.com image 150x131]


Wow, two missed the spelling error.  Nice.
 
2013-10-23 02:02:33 PM  
I thought time was simply another dimension. Everything is always moving at the speed of light if you add up the time and space vectors, and time dilation is simply a result of moving so fast in space that the time vector gets shrunk down noticeably.

In fact, I wonder if you could model it so that the universe was expanding into the time dimension like an onion, and massive objects, by the property of inertia, move more slowly forward in the time dimension, causing gravitational time dilation.
 
2013-10-23 02:05:17 PM  
Whoa... Get this...

What if... What if *our* observable universe is just a couple of "static" entangled particles within a much larger universe?

Did I just, like, blow your mind?
 
2013-10-23 02:07:18 PM  

Psychopusher: So ... to an outside observer, is this the extra-universal equivalent of a watched pot never boiling?


Literally, yes.
 
2013-10-23 02:11:12 PM  
Not like an onion, more like a balloon. The onion would be more of a representation of the past.
 
2013-10-23 02:25:28 PM  
The greatest minds of our generation are working to put online ads in front of me, and the second greatest are worried about this. Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.

I'm all for science. I just wish science was better at prioritizing.
 
2013-10-23 02:30:00 PM  

Scrotastic Method: The greatest minds of our generation are working to put online ads in front of me, and the second greatest are worried about this. Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.

I'm all for science. I just wish science was better at prioritizing.


I'm going to go out on a limb and say that scientists work on more than one thing at a time.
 
rpm
2013-10-23 02:38:02 PM  

Scrotastic Method: Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.


uhhhh, guess what fusion is? And how they're looking at modelling markets now?
 
2013-10-23 02:38:46 PM  

Elemental79: Scrotastic Method: The greatest minds of our generation are working to put online ads in front of me, and the second greatest are worried about this. Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.

I'm all for science. I just wish science was better at prioritizing.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that scientists work on more than one thing at a time.


So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?
 
2013-10-23 02:40:01 PM  

Scrotastic Method: The greatest minds of our generation are working to put online ads in front of me, and the second greatest are worried about this. Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.

I'm all for science. I just wish science was better at prioritizing.


The impacts of theoretical physics can't be known before they happen.  That doesn't mean they're useless or without benefit.

Einstein sitting around thinking about what it must feel like to be a photon had no practical use at the time.  Half of modern-day electronics wouldn't exist without someone having done just that, however, including cheaper and cleaner power sources.  Additionally, relativity has influenced understanding of chemistry, leading to new and better medications and treatments even beyond things like MRIs and PET scans.

We have literally no idea where this kind of study will lead.  I'm all for working on targeted projects such as you mention - and people are.  But basic science is still worth studying as well.
 
2013-10-23 02:41:07 PM  

Scrotastic Method: So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?


No - its more that we dont know what will be useful, so generally complaints about how scientists aren't doing anything to solve "real world" problems are silly.  It is possible that research based on what these guys are doing will lead to breakthroughs that will be total game changers w/r/t some of the problems you mentioned.  It is also possible it will juts help us understand things better.  Nothing wrong with that either.
 
2013-10-23 02:41:16 PM  
No, subby, money emerges from ATM TYME machines, with a y.  Not time machines, that's just stupid.

farm2.staticflickr.com
 
2013-10-23 02:48:52 PM  

Scrotastic Method: Elemental79: Scrotastic Method: The greatest minds of our generation are working to put online ads in front of me, and the second greatest are worried about this. Physics is cool, but not cool enough to feed starving kids, end AIDS in Africa, put people in houses, create cheap and clean power sources, treat drug addictions, regulate the international banking system, etc.

I'm all for science. I just wish science was better at prioritizing.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that scientists work on more than one thing at a time.

So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?


I don't know. What is the ratio of Quantum Physicists to other more directly impactful sciences? How many Quantum Physicists should there be relative to these other scientists? I am not aware of any numbers so I don't want to say something stupid. But if it's disproportionate I'd like to know.
 
2013-10-23 02:49:04 PM  
So, from "outside" the universe the universe appears static and you can see all space and time at once. Does that mean that everything is predetermined and there was no point in buying a powerball ticket?
 
2013-10-23 02:52:34 PM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: So,,,  A bit less 'wibbly wobbly', then?

Seriously, it's neat how well this meshes in with the only decent theoretical model of a universe that allows propagation of information forward and backward through time that I have ever seen, James P. Hogan's 'Thrice Upon a Time'.

Anyone interested in discussing time travel on a serious basis really should read that one.



I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers that book!


Oh, and


www.nndb.com


R.I.P. James P. Hogan

 
2013-10-23 03:33:07 PM  

KarmicDisaster: So, from "outside" the universe the universe appears static and you can see all space and time at once. Does that mean that everything is predetermined and there was no point in buying a powerball ticket?


Whether you buy a Powerball ticket or not and whether you win or not was predetermined.
 
2013-10-23 03:38:38 PM  

RalphW: Whoa... Get this...

What if... What if *our* observable universe is just a couple of "static" entangled particles within a much larger universe?

Did I just, like, blow your mind?


Dude, there's a universe in all of us.
img853.imageshack.us
 
2013-10-23 04:08:01 PM  

Teiritzamna: Scrotastic Method: So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?

No - its more that we dont know what will be useful, so generally complaints about how scientists aren't doing anything to solve "real world" problems are silly.  It is possible that research based on what these guys are doing will lead to breakthroughs that will be total game changers w/r/t some of the problems you mentioned.  It is also possible it will juts help us understand things better.  Nothing wrong with that either.


I totally get that. But that argument sounds to me like buying a lottery ticket because you're broke, when there's "now hiring" signs all up and down your street.
 
2013-10-23 04:13:42 PM  

LostInTranslation: "The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare."


Let's see how they're doing ... "It was the best of times, it was the BLURST of times?!  You stupid monkey!"
 
2013-10-23 04:32:39 PM  

whither_apophis: ampoliros: Attentions theists, deists, etc. Just because the article and experiment mention an "outside observer" does not prove that there is one; it's a construct to prove or disprove parts of the experiment.

However it does mesh very neatly with the ancient argument that to God all time is simultaneous.


Except that it doesn't. The moment the "deity" evens observes us it is no longer a "deity."

Good can only be God if he isn't... Or something.
 
2013-10-23 04:33:45 PM  
Money does magically emerge from nothing when you take out a bank loan. The money they loaned you did not exist prior to the loan and is Automagically(tm) created out of thin air.
 
2013-10-23 04:38:38 PM  

Prophet of Loss: Money does magically emerge from nothing when you take out a bank loan. The money they loaned you did not exist prior to the loan and is Automagically(tm) created out of thin air.


Well, mostly... except for the portion that must be held in reserve in fractional reserve banking....  $30,000 loan, 10% reserve, $27,000 created out of nothing.
 
2013-10-23 04:43:46 PM  
'In this case, the observer cannot detect any difference between the photons without becoming entangled with one or the other. And if there is no difference, the system appears static. In other words, time does not emerge.'

Am I reading this correctly to essentially mean that you can't measure the result without 'entering' the universe, and as such you can't observe any difference?

So If 'change' = 'time' (which makes sense), and you can't see change from outside, therefore time only exists 'inside'?

Neat.
 
2013-10-23 04:44:07 PM  

Scrotastic Method: Teiritzamna: Scrotastic Method: So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?

No - its more that we dont know what will be useful, so generally complaints about how scientists aren't doing anything to solve "real world" problems are silly.  It is possible that research based on what these guys are doing will lead to breakthroughs that will be total game changers w/r/t some of the problems you mentioned.  It is also possible it will juts help us understand things better.  Nothing wrong with that either.

I totally get that. But that argument sounds to me like buying a lottery ticket because you're broke, when there's "now hiring" signs all up and down your street.


Assuming quantum physics is ultimately a waste of time to study, a more apt analogy could be the unemployed fellow took a few minutes from his day to laugh at a joke when he could have been writing a resume during those 3 minutes. The opposite extreme of what you are saying.

You have to have some numbers to go on to make the determination if it is worth the resource you have allocated to the endeavor. I don't see how you can make that judgement without any information.

And then why limit that to scientific fields? Shouldn't everyone be solely working towards solutions to major world problems? Couldn't someone make an argument, equally as valid, that no amount of time should be spent doing anything that isn't directly resulting in solutions to problems we are facing right now.

You might be able to make that argument. But you need to bring something more to the table to discuss than an empty assertion.
 
2013-10-23 04:47:35 PM  

ampoliros: whither_apophis: ampoliros: Attentions theists, deists, etc. Just because the article and experiment mention an "outside observer" does not prove that there is one; it's a construct to prove or disprove parts of the experiment.

However it does mesh very neatly with the ancient argument that to God all time is simultaneous.

Except that it doesn't. The moment the "deity" evens observes us it is no longer a "deity."

Good can only be God if he isn't... Or something.


quizzicaldog.jpg
 
2013-10-23 04:48:38 PM  
This makes sense.

In quantum mechanics, the unitary evolution function is time-agnostic: it doesn't care if it's going backwards or forwards.  However, the observation step introduces a discontinuity, and is *not* reversible.  It is exactly this observation step that breaks quantum entanglement.   So, if there is a non-thermodynamic arrow of time (i.e. there is an arrow time distinct from entropy), quantum mechanics basically says it *has* to be related to observation breaking entanglement, because it's the only non-time-reversible system we work with(yes, there are CP violations in some obscure places... somehow I don't think those are the underlying reason behind the arrow of time).

The "outside" the universe view is also intuitively correct.  General relativity views space-time as a coherent, 4-dimensional object.  So, if you take that view, nothing ever "happens" (or, alternatively, everything is always happening) because you are looking at time as a whole.  So in that sense, nothing would ever change.

What's really going to be tricky is re-stitching space-time from these quantum entanglement-breakings.  Because time and space are intimately related, this means that space-time itself is an emergent phenomenon (already hinted at by holographic symmetries).

I am not sure what it would mean to try and build a physical model without using time and space as givens... some kind of network theory a la New Kind of Science (most of that is self-masturbatory horseshiat, but he does have a few interesting ideas in there)?
 
2013-10-23 04:53:29 PM  

jeffmw: KarmicDisaster: So, from "outside" the universe the universe appears static and you can see all space and time at once. Does that mean that everything is predetermined and there was no point in buying a powerball ticket?

Whether you buy a Powerball ticket or not and whether you win or not was predetermined.


Well, if the Universe is unchanging (static) as viewed from the outside, then that means that you can see everything that ever happened or will happen at all at once from the outside, and there is no change from that point of view. That means that from outside, everything appears predetermined since it never changes. We only experience time here inside the Universe and Einstein was right "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." So, should I buy a ticket or not?
 
2013-10-23 05:25:00 PM  
sounds to me like this is a case of the theory and experiment being so f-ing inconsequential that you gotta get some guy to do a write up which attempts to fool you into thinking you have some understanding by mixing more fine grained explanation with sweeping caveats without proper context. what crap. for shame!
 
2013-10-23 08:04:37 PM  

Clever Neologism: This makes sense.

In quantum mechanics, the unitary evolution function is time-agnostic: it doesn't care if it's going backwards or forwards.  However, the observation step introduces a discontinuity, and is *not* reversible.  It is exactly this observation step that breaks quantum entanglement.   So, if there is a non-thermodynamic arrow of time (i.e. there is an arrow time distinct from entropy), quantum mechanics basically says it *has* to be related to observation breaking entanglement, because it's the only non-time-reversible system we work with(yes, there are CP violations in some obscure places... somehow I don't think those are the underlying reason behind the arrow of time).

The "outside" the universe view is also intuitively correct.  General relativity views space-time as a coherent, 4-dimensional object.  So, if you take that view, nothing ever "happens" (or, alternatively, everything is always happening) because you are looking at time as a whole.  So in that sense, nothing would ever change.

What's really going to be tricky is re-stitching space-time from these quantum entanglement-breakings.  Because time and space are intimately related, this means that space-time itself is an emergent phenomenon (already hinted at by holographic symmetries).

I am not sure what it would mean to try and build a physical model without using time and space as givens... some kind of network theory a la New Kind of Science (most of that is self-masturbatory horseshiat, but he does have a few interesting ideas in there)?


Cut to the chase,,,when do I get my warp drive?
 
2013-10-23 08:32:10 PM  

Leader O'Cola: Scientists never prove anything.


I didn't know Karl Popper had a fark account.
 
2013-10-23 08:50:51 PM  

Smoky Dragon Dish: Prophet of Loss: Money does magically emerge from nothing when you take out a bank loan. The money they loaned you did not exist prior to the loan and is Automagically(tm) created out of thin air.

Well, mostly... except for the portion that must be held in reserve in fractional reserve banking....  $30,000 loan, 10% reserve, $27,000 created out of nothing.


suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com

Assuming a 1 for 10 reserve. However, some investment banks are leveraged well over 100 for 1.
 
2013-10-23 09:04:33 PM  
"The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare."

I once attempted to prove this theorem but the result, unfortunately, was the complete works of William Shatner.

/The monkeys even made minor improvements to the first two TekWar books
 
2013-10-23 09:24:46 PM  

Scrotastic Method: Teiritzamna: Scrotastic Method: So you think we have enough people devoted to hunger, clean energy, blah blah blah?

No - its more that we dont know what will be useful, so generally complaints about how scientists aren't doing anything to solve "real world" problems are silly.  It is possible that research based on what these guys are doing will lead to breakthroughs that will be total game changers w/r/t some of the problems you mentioned.  It is also possible it will juts help us understand things better.  Nothing wrong with that either.

I totally get that. But that argument sounds to me like buying a lottery ticket because you're broke, when there's "now hiring" signs all up and down your street.


Yeah, I hear the Climate shop gives you a totally pimpin' Cadillac if you go work for them...
 
Displayed 50 of 58 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report