Science Einstein wrong, spooky action at distance is real - One step closer to the warp drive

I am admittedly trying to figure out what all they are talking about here, so I may be wrong. Feel free to correct me, but the basic gestalt I am gathering is that this test proves that photons can become entangled at a distance, and that the act of measuring them effects their behavior. Further, the "action" that occurs is transmitted through the quantum entanglement at a speed faster then light. In order to prove this they had to add the human element of "free will" into the procedure, as even a computerized random number generator would be manipulated by the phenomenon. Spooky stuff.

http://www.sci-news.com/physics/einsteins-principle-local-realism-big-bell-test-05998.html

Global Experiment Challenges Einstein’s Principle of Local Realism: BIG Bell Test

A Bell test, named for the Northern Irish physicist John Stewart Bell, is a randomized trial that compares observations against the philosophical worldview of local realism, in which the properties of the physical world are independent of our observation of them and no signal travels faster than light. On November 30, 2016, more than 100,000 people contributed to the so-called BIG Bell Test. Using internet-connected devices, volunteers generated more than 90 million binary choices, which were directed via a scalable web platform to 12 labs, where experiments tested local realism using photons, single atoms, atomic ensembles and superconducting devices. The results are reported in the journal Nature.

The BIG Bell Test was an incredibly challenging and ambitious project,” said Dr. Carlos Abellán, a researcher at the Institut de Ciencies Fotoniques at the Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology in Spain.

“It sounded impossibly difficult on day zero, but became a reality through the efforts of dozens of passionate scientists, science communicators, journalists and media, and especially the tens of thousands of people that contributed to the experiment during November 30, 2016.”

In a Bell test, pairs of entangled particles such as photons are generated and sent to different locations, where particle properties such as the photons’ colors or time of arrival are measured.

If the measurement results tend to agree, regardless of which properties we choose to measure, it implies something very surprising: either the measurement of one particle instantly affects the other particle (despite being far away), or even stranger, the properties never really existed, but rather were created by the measurement itself.

Either possibility contradicts local realism, Einstein’s worldview of a universe independent of our observations, in which no influence can travel faster than light.

The BIG Bell Test asked volunteers to choose the measurements, in order to close the so-called ‘freedom-of-choice loophole’ — the possibility that the particles themselves influence the choice of measurement. Such influence, if it existed, would invalidate the test; it would be like allowing students to write their own exam questions.

This loophole cannot be closed by choosing with dice or random number generators, because there is always the possibility that these physical systems are coordinated with the entangled particles.

Human choices introduce the element of free will, by which people can choose independently of whatever the particles might be doing.

The BIG Bell Test participants contributed unpredictable sequences of zeros and ones (bits) through an online video game.

The bits were routed to state-of-the-art experiments in Brisbane, Shanghai, Vienna, Rome, Munich, Zurich, Nice, Barcelona, Buenos Aires, Concepción Chile and Boulder Colorado, where they were used to set the angles of polarizers and other laboratory elements to determine how entangled particles were measured.

The participants contributed with 97,347,490 bits, making possible a strong test of local realism, as well as other experiments on realism in quantum mechanics.

The obtained results strongly disagree Einstein’s worldview, close the freedom-of-choice loophole for the first time, and demonstrate several new methods in the study of entanglement and local realism.

Each of the 12 labs carried out a different experiment, to test local realism in different physical systems and to test other concepts related to realism.

“Our team explores the Bell’s inequality with partial perfect randomness input,” said researchers from the CAS Center for Excellence and Synergetic Innovation Center in Quantum Information and Quantum Physics at the University of Science and Technology of China (CAS-USTC).

“Analyzing the random numbers contributed by the volunteers, we may find the human random number are not perfectly random, and tend to produce patterns. However, the human generated randomness is highly attractive because of the element of human free will.”

“True randomness, which is not controlled by hidden variables, exists in between the human choices. Remarkably, it is able to say how well the hidden variable would have to control the human choices.”

“This is made possible by using a special type of Bell inequality, the measurement dependent local (MDL) inequality.”

In the experiment, a 780 nm pump laser focused on a periodically poled potassium titanyl phosphate (PPKTP) crystal to create photon pairs at 1560 nm via spontaneous parametric down conversion. The down-converted photon pairs interfere at the polarizing beam splitter (PBS) in a Sagnac based setup to create entangled pairs.

The entangled state is adjusted to be a special non-maximum entangled state for the inequality.

“The photon pairs are then sent to two measurement stations that are 90 m away for measurement. This spatial separation makes sure the measurement in Alice’s lab will not affect that in Bob’s lab, and vice versa,” the scientists said.

“The random numbers contributed by the participants control the Pockels cell to set the measurement basis for each pair of photons.”

“The photons are finally detected with superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors.”

The violation of the MDL Bell inequality gives the bound of the input human randomness to rule out local realism. With around 80 Mb random numbers contributed by the volunteers, the MDL Bell inequality violation is decided to be l = 0.10 ± 0.05.

“Although there are numerous Bell test experiments, the ‘free will’ loophole is still not closed,” said Professor Jian-Wei Pan, a researcher at CAS-USTC.

“This experiment is a very interesting and important try. In the future, with the help of space station, one may close both ‘collapse locality’ and ‘free will’ loopholes in one experiment.”
 
Also I'm VERY skeptical about the suggestion that human free will is somehow above the physical (i.e. literally metaphysical). I'm not suggesting it absolutely cannot be, but this is an hypothesis to be proven, rather than an assumption to be taken for granted, or an axiom to be declared by fiat. This is too close to Sartre for my blood.

Yeah that's the bit that bothers me. I'm just about to sit an exam about the neuroscience of freewill and honestly I'm not even that convinced humans have free will anymore but even if we do it's certainly physically based and therefore made of the same matter as everything else. If you're interested Libet was the first to investigate 'free will' from a neuroscience perspective and there's been quite a lot of interesting stuff since.
 
This is mindfuck voodoo shit. If nothing travels faster than light, how do the entangled particles communicate a state change to each other instantly? Over what medium?
The obvious leap to make is that they aren't two different particles communicating over a great distance, they're the same particle. Or two aspects of the same particle. Sort of like how you can draw a line on a graph & then select two points on that line, they would be two different points otherwise unrelated to each other, but they are related in the coxtext of being two segments of an infinite number of segments of a construct called "line." And if you made it 3D, that line is say, a garden hose. Lay it on the ground flat, twisting the garden hose clockwise ultimately twists the whole garden hose clockwise, or more specifically both points or segments of the garden hose you're observing.

Now make that garden hose a string, strung between the viewing area on two adjacent microscopes. You pretend you can't see the string other than through the microscope. You view the string through the lens on microscope A, and ask someone to twist the string one direction. Your partner views the string twisting the same direction through microscope B.

Now imagine this same behavior worked with an infinitely long string. Microscope A is here on Earth, and microscope B is on Betelgeuse after we've terraformed it in twenty years. You agree beforehand that when you want to "talk" to Betelgeuse, you'll twist the string clockwise for a second 3 times, counterclockwise for a second 3 times, and finally clockwise again for a second three times, like an S.O.S. in morse code. Then your message begins; a clockwise spin for 2 seconds is a "one" in binary, a counterclockwise spin for 2 seconds is "zero" in binary. You crank out your code, and the microscope on Betelgeuse sees it happening in real time as you're twisting it here on Earth. It takes twenty minutes of autistic string manipulation, but you eventually crank out binary instructions for a BASIC computer to printscreen a 20x20 ASCII image of a dick going between buttcheeks made out of parantheses and punctuation marks, and you both get intergalactic boners.

Where was I going with this? I don't remember, something about the universe being filled with cosmic strings and the highly limited way in which we observe the universe and our own concepts. We can't even see the entire spectrum of light ourselves, it's no surprise that we can't see how these photons are connected. But we can use them to send and download smut in unprecedented ways and that's going to be great in some way.
 
Now imagine this same behavior worked with an infinitely long string. Microscope A is here on Earth, and microscope B is on Betelgeuse after we've terraformed it in twenty years. You agree beforehand that when you want to "talk" to Betelgeuse, you'll twist the string clockwise for a second 3 times, counterclockwise for a second 3 times, and finally clockwise again for a second three times, like an S.O.S. in morse code. Then your message begins; a clockwise spin for 2 seconds is a "one" in binary, a counterclockwise spin for 2 seconds is "zero" in binary. You crank out your code, and the microscope on Betelgeuse sees it happening in real time as you're twisting it here on Earth. It takes twenty minutes of autistic string manipulation, but you eventually crank out binary instructions for a BASIC computer to printscreen a 20x20 ASCII image of a dick going between buttcheeks made out of parantheses and punctuation marks, and you both get intergalactic boners.

You heard it here first folks. For millions of years, humanity evolved and along the way we slowly came to master our environment and reality. We discovered fire, how to cultivate plants and animals, how to harness the power of the atoms, to fly, to travel to space, and at the end of the road we will finally be able to understand the nature of space and time that we will be able to effect instant communications between two different stellar systems.

So that a man in the Sol system can show a picture of his dick to a woman in the Betelgeuse system.
 
Can someone smart explain how this test works? They make two photons, entangle them whatever that means, send them to different rooms, and then measure them both at the same time? Or do they measure one, note what it is, and then measure the other one, and the two get the same measurement, despite the fact that the distance and time between the two measurements means that they would have to communicate faster than the speed of light? And why would they have to be communicating with each other? Why couldn't they just be the same to begin with?
Imagine a pair of gloves, you put them into packages, send it two different places, someone opens one package, sees a left glove, so he immediately knows that the other box contains the right glove. This is that faster-than-light thing, and as you can see, it cannot send any information.
The actual quantum reality is a bit more complex and the glove analogy is absolutely unsatisfactory. I'll give it a try:
Imagine a plus-shaped hole and a needle falling through it. It will come out at either 0° angle or 90° angle.
Imagine now two needles that are perpendicular. If they are entangled, then one will come out at 0° and another at 90°. If they are not, it will be more random.
But that example could still be explained with local variables (like the gloves). A more surprising result is this:
Imagine two perpendicular entangled needles. One falls through a plus-shaped hole and comes out a the 0° angle. Then you pass the second needle through a slightly rotated plus-shaped hole. Then the chances for each result for that second needle are exactly as if that needle just fell through of the first hole at the 90° angle, regardless of how those two needles were generated.
Note that this still doesn't send any faster-than-light information.

Is there any actual evidence that quantum states are affected by our observation of them?
By "observation" they understand any process that dissipates the information about the state far enough and breaks entanglement. Any macroscopic object can "observe".
 
Imagine a pair of gloves, you put them into packages, send it two different places, someone opens one package, sees a left glove, so he immediately knows that the other box contains the right glove. This is that faster-than-light thing, and as you can see, it cannot send any information.
The actual quantum reality is a bit more complex and the glove analogy is absolutely unsatisfactory. I'll give it a try:
Imagine a plus-shaped hole and a needle falling through it. It will come out at either 0° angle or 90° angle.
Imagine now two needles that are perpendicular. If they are entangled, then one will come out at 0° and another at 90°. If they are not, it will be more random.
But that example could still be explained with local variables (like the gloves). A more surprising result is this:
Imagine two perpendicular entangled needles. One falls through a plus-shaped hole and comes out a the 0° angle. Then you pass the second needle through a slightly rotated plus-shaped hole. Then the chances for each result for that second needle are exactly as if that needle just fell through of the first hole at the 90° angle, regardless of how those two needles were generated.
Note that this still doesn't send any faster-than-light information.


By "observation" they understand any process that dissipates the information about the state far enough and breaks entanglement. Any macroscopic object can "observe".
What's the point you're making by rotating the second hole in that last part? That the needle can come out the other side in a way that wouldn't normally be possible?
 
tl;dr: nothing big here. This is another experiment, in the long line of experiments, that helps clarify that there is no such thing as local hidden variables. This does not eliminate the idea of local hidden variables (we'd still need to decide if "human free will" is actually a thing or not), and it doesn't eliminate the concept of global hidden variables.

It's certainly the largest bell test we've conducted as a species, so that's pretty cool, but in the grand scheme of things all it does is help provide some more confidence that "spooky action at a distance" is real (something we've pretty much known for a while). It doesn't help us solve anything, like how that spooky action at a distance is supposed to work, but it's a cool experiment.

So ... ok then.

I'm still not ruling out the fact that at least my descendants will be able to enjoy warp drives.

Sort of. The faster-than-light communication only occurs between two photons which are entangled. For two photons which aren't entangled, then this faster-than-light interaction does not occur. Best analogy I can give is tugging on a piece of string-you only notice if you're holding both ends of the same string.

Don't bother asking what entanglement means, I never understood it myself.

The string analogy makes sense. It's still a little over my head. I always liked science but never pursued it because I was so piss poor at math that I had too much fear to try anything course-wise beyond basic requirements.
 
Okay, FTL, ansibles, that's nice, but if perception can alter particles from distance, does it mean psychic powers can also be real?
The Space Age won't have truly begun until Null is forced into making an InterGalactic Cows forum where we post about Lolcows lightyears away.

Hell, for all we know, one of the aliens might actually be sentient, but socially maladjusted cows.
Can you imagine the Galactic Kiwifarms thread titles? "Zorblanox Theta-Zero: Procene's vertebrae manlet, cucked by Alpha Centauri killbot". "Dhsjxg'ruzho-Yrsbau: got space autism by abducting and eating Chris-Chan's brains, twice banned from Hypernet Comms". "Marbulon "John" Spazugar: human-kin hydrogen addict, sold concubines for Steam games".
 
Yeah that's the bit that bothers me. I'm just about to sit an exam about the neuroscience of freewill and honestly I'm not even that convinced humans have free will anymore but even if we do it's certainly physically based and therefore made of the same matter as everything else. If you're interested Libet was the first to investigate 'free will' from a neuroscience perspective and there's been quite a lot of interesting stuff since.
If free will is physically based, then it's not free will. Unless you don't believe in a deterministic universe.
 
Sort of. The faster-than-light communication only occurs between two photons which are entangled. For two photons which aren't entangled, then this faster-than-light interaction does not occur. Best analogy I can give is tugging on a piece of string-you only notice if you're holding both ends of the same string.

Don't bother asking what entanglement means, I never understood it myself.
That is just so damn cool. Thanks for the info!
 
Back