Slashdot Mirror


Uncertainty Sets Limits On Quantum Nonlocality

An anonymous reader writes "Research in today's issue of the journal Science helps explain why quantum theory is as weird as it is, but not weirder. Ex-hacker Stephanie Wehner and physicist Jonathan Oppenheim showed that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle sets limits on Einstein's 'spooky action at a distance.' Wired reports that the discovery was made by 'thinking of things in the way a hacker might' to uncover a fundamental link between the two defining properties of quantum physics (abstract, supplement). Oppenheim describes how uncertainty and nonlocality are like coding problems, enabling us to make a quantitative link between two of the cornerstones of quantum theory."

3 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Locality == Free Will? by somersault · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if there were external forces acting to control your will in this universe, how do you know they're non-deterministic themselves?

    Individuals certainly are responsible for their own choices anyway, even if you can accurately simulate 100% beforehand what they're going to choose.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  2. Define 'observe' by Twinbee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, rant time.

    Whenever I see a beginner's guide to quantum theory, I always invariably see a phrase similar to:
    "Stranger still, the electron doesn't even have properties like position and momentum until an observer measures them. "

    And every time, I always think "define 'observe'", because that word is incredibly fluffy, vague as well as being immensely irritating. If a bat miles away happens to look in that direction with nothing in the way, is that counted as an observation? Are there a trillion different ways to observe it, and have they all been tried out to see the phenomenon stands? None, I repeat NONE of the articles I have ever read actually even remotely begins to touch upon that subject.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    1. Re:Define 'observe' by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. It's phenomenologically pretty well-defined, inasmuch as we can set up systems and we know whether we're observing them or not, and what'll happen to them if we do observe them, but we haven't a clue as to the mechanistics of it all.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?