ars: Quantum memory may topple Heisenberg

[bystander]

Quantum memory may topple Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
ars technica | 02 Aug 2010

A quantum memory may be all scientists need to beat the limit of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, according to a paper published in Nature Physics. According to a group of researchers, maximally entangling a particle with a quantum memory and measuring one of the particle's variables, like its position, should snap the quantum memory in a corresponding state, which could then be measured. This would allow them to do something long thought verboten by the laws of physics: figure out the state of certain pairs of variables at the exact same time with an unprecedented amount of certainty.

Our ability to observe particles at the quantum level is currently limited by Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Heisenberg noticed that when someone measured one variable of a particle, such as its position, there were some other variables, like momentum, that could not be simultaneously measured with as much precision—there was a small amount of uncertainty applied to one or both of the measurements.

The physical reasoning behind this is hard to follow. But Paul Dirac, another physicist, made up a scenario to illustrate why some variables have this contentious relationship.

Dirac pointed out that one of the only ways to measure a particle's position is by bouncing a photon off of it, and seeing where and how that photon lands on a detector. How the photon lands completely describes the particle's position, but by hitting it, the measurement changes the particle's momentum.

Likewise, a measure of momentum would change the particle's position. Because of this quirk, scientists thought it was impossible to know certain pairs of variables that affect one another at the same exact time with a very high degree of precision.

Then along came entanglement. When two particles are entangled, reading even one variable of one of the particles collapses the wavefunction of both particles, giving finite values to all related variables.
...
In theory, there should be a measurement of the quantum memory that would yield the same result as the measurement done on the particle. The uncertainty relation between the measurement and any other incompatible variables wouldn't be present in the quantum memory, however, allowing observers to see exact measurements for two incompatible variables at the exact same instant in time.

Of course, the operative phrase here is "in theory." The research paper, thought a bit esoteric and lacking in detail, supports its argument with math involving Hilbert systems and entropy. But no experiment has yet taken place because our equipment isn't advanced enough yet.

The uncertainty principle in the presence of quantum memory - M Berta et al

• Nature Physics (advance online) (25 July 2010) DOI: 10.1038/nphys1734

[neufer]

Quantum memory may topple Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
ars technica | 02 Aug 2010

Of course, the operative phrase here is "in theory." The research paper, thought a bit esoteric and lacking in detail, supports its argument with math involving Hilbert systems and entropy. But no experiment has yet taken place because our equipment isn't advanced enough yet.

Dilbert systems and entropy

---

[Henning Makholm]

In theory, there should be a measurement of the quantum memory that would yield the same result as the measurement done on the particle. The uncertainty relation between the measurement and any other incompatible variables wouldn't be present in the quantum memory, however,

Sounds to me like the researchers in question have simply defined "quantum memory" to mean something with properties that no physical system can have, and then assumed that one could be made anyway.

Or, alternatively, that someone along the way has applied the uncertainty principle in a wrong way (it is rather tricky stuff to use deductively without taking a wrong step), and then when they finally arrived at a contradiction further down their calculations interpreted it as a way to construct a perpetuum mobile.

[Beyond]

The only thing that i know about Heisenberg (so far) is that the originater of Star Trek named some transporter filters after him because he did something important in science.

[neufer]

The only thing that i know about Heisenberg (so far) is that the originator of Star Trek named some transporter filters after him because he did something important in science.

Are you certain about that?

[Henning Makholm]

The only thing that i know about Heisenberg (so far) is that the originater of Star Trek named some transporter filters after him because he did something important in science.

Why, he only invented Quantum Mechanics.

(Though not quite the thing we call "quantum mechanics" today, but a sub-theory which is more commonly called "matrix mechanics". I have a copy of a 1928 textbook that present the "Quantum Mechanics" of Heisenberg as an alternative to Schrödingers "Wave Mechanics". A few years later, Dirac came up with a unifying formalism between Heisenberg and Schrödinger, and took over the name "quantum mechanics").

[Beyond]

The only thing that i know about Heisenberg (so far) is that the originator of Star Trek named some transporter filters after him because he did something important in science.

Are you certain about that?

YES! I'm pretty sure it was in the Next Generation series. I seem to remember #1 being involved with speaking about them. There was also another show that talked about Star Trek and it's history and the awards they received and other things and they also mentioned how the transporter filters came to be named Heisenberg filters.

[Beyond]

Henning Makholm wrote;"why, he only invented Quantum Mechanics."
Actually i do not think anyone actually invents anything. It's like all things are; and those who have perception, perceive them.

I just went and Yahoo'd Quantum mechanics and found a simpler explantion of it. I really had to laugh though, because the very particle(photon)thats being studied, actually keeps an eye on the humans that are studying it. When the humans are watching (or trying to detect) to see what the photon does, it behaves itself and acts pretty much normal. When the humans are not watching or trying to detect what it is doing the photons involved act like they all are aware of each other and act a different way.
Of course they do. That is no mystery at all. Photons are part of the light that is part of the Great Intelligence that the Universe is in and made up of, even though it would not seem like it at times. When scientists talk about The Exquisite order of things, they are unknowingly referring to what i call - The Great Intelligence. When Humans are watching the behavior of photons, the Great Intelligence is watching the humans. This may get really interesting in the future.

[Beyond]

An addendum to my last post.
The Great Intelligence that i referred to, i see as being the matrix of all things. It has nothing to do with worship of any form(that belongs with a being man calls God).
This Great Intelligence is where science and math and existence (as we know it) comes from. It is the foundation upon which all things are built. I see it as being the order of the Universe.

[bystander]

Are you certain about that?

I think you aimed too high, you may have missed the target, but I'm uncertain about that.

[Beyond]

The only thing that i know about Heisenberg (so far) is that the originater of Star Trek named some transporter filters after him because he did something important in science.

My ageing brain has pulled out of the dust that the transporter filters were part of a compensation system. So the refference to Heisenberg very well could have been -- Heisenberg compensators. Yes, that seems to be correct.
Old dusty thoughts may be preserved in the dryness of the dust, but it sure can take a while(sometimes) to find them.

[bystander]

the reference to Heisenberg

Heisenberg uncertainty principle

[Beyond]

Now that i have remembered the correct terminology, i Yahooed it (Heisenberg Compensators). The definition and functions are listed under Capabilities and Limitations.

[Beyond]

Boy! That was a terrible last post i did. Must have been before i turned on the air-conditioner
For a history of why the compensators in the Star Trek transporters were called >Heisenberg Compensators< Just Google, Yahoo, or Bing Heisenberg Compensators. Interesting reading - especially if you are a Star Trek fan.

[bystander]

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle still certain
Science News | Deleted Scenes | 05 Aug 2010

Despite rumors to the contrary, a mainstay of quantum physics is just as (un)certain as ever.

At first glance, a Nature Physics paper published online July 25 may have appeared to threaten the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which says that in the quantum world of electrons, photons and other tiny particles it’s impossible to know certain pairs of physical properties, such as a particle’s position and the momentum, at the same time.

The paper reports that in certain quantum scenarios, it’s possible to have a device that stores knowledge of the exact position and exact momentum of a particle. But try to stifle your panicky screams for just a little bit longer. After a reasonable amount of scrutiny (and a few quick checks with study coauthor Roger Colbeck at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada), I found out that the result won’t have Heisenberg rolling over in his grave anytime soon.
...
Rather, the paper points out that in certain extreme quantum scenarios, the uncertainty principle may not apply in its original form.
...
For more details, check out one of the paper author’s blog posts about the result here.