gill1109 wrote:... well actually it was Mermin's exoeriment, first. But anyway...
gill1109 wrote:Of course if Joy would agree on a computer simulation of his exploding colourful balls we could in principle do his experiment a whole lot more cheaply than what he has in mind...
gill1109 wrote:(I guess he has contacts with some renegade scientist from Kazachstan or something...)
Joy Christian wrote:gill1109 wrote:... well actually it was Mermin's exoeriment, first. But anyway...
Not quite. Mermin had nothing to do with it. It is based on Bell's own local model, described in eqs. (8) to (10) of his famous 1964 paper. This model was turned into a thought experiment involving a bomb by Peres, published in AJP, and later in his book (as cited in this 2008 paper of mine: http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.3078). Peres's description, however, is still just an abstract description. It takes a bit of a thought to turn his abstract description into a realizable experiment. My proposal of how to realize the experiment is still just a sketch; although according to the Nobel Laureate David Wineland it is "doable." If realized, it may not involve exploding balls.gill1109 wrote:Of course if Joy would agree on a computer simulation of his exploding colourful balls we could in principle do his experiment a whole lot more cheaply than what he has in mind...
In principle I have no problem with a computer simulation of the experiment. The challenge would be to simulate the physical space S^3 in which the ball explodes.gill1109 wrote:(I guess he has contacts with some renegade scientist from Kazachstan or something...)
As far as I know, David Wineland lives in Colorado, United States of America, not in Kazachstan or something.
Ben6993 wrote:My comments are probably only showing my lack of ability to see any simulation as a good enough representation of the experiment.
Joy Christian wrote:Ben6993 wrote:My comments are probably only showing my lack of ability to see any simulation as a good enough representation of the experiment.
Ben, you are being modest.
A simulation is merely a crude implementation of whatever is being simulated. If simulations were good enough, we would all be simulating our travels than flying.
gill1109 wrote:If Joy can explain his mathematics clearly enough then a competent computer programmer can program it. No problem with computer implementation of algebra in S^7 or S^3 or whatever.
Joy Christian wrote:The challenge would be to implement the true geometry and topology of the physical space in the simulation from the beginning.
In other words, the challenge would be to simulate the physical space as S^3, not as R^3. The bombs are exploding in S^3, not in R^3.
I asked Chantal Roth, but she said she does not know how to simulate S^3 without having to discard some "events" "a posteriori", as in Michel Fodje's simulation.
gill1109 wrote:So you have to explain to her (or someone like her) how to simulate the motion of hemispherical objects in S^3.
gill1109 wrote:What is the singlet state of two half ping-pong balls? When is the spin of a half ping-ball a bivector?
Mikko wrote:gill1109 wrote:What is the singlet state of two half ping-pong balls? When is the spin of a half ping-ball a bivector?
It means that the initial spin is zero. This requires that the initial body is a boson. If it is uncharged (which seems reasonable) it must contain an even number of neutrons. This might be hard to arrange in a real experiment but should be no problem in simulation.
gill1109 wrote:Mikko, there is no difficulty at all in doing a quantum mechanical simulation.
Mikko wrote:gill1109 wrote:Mikko, there is no difficulty at all in doing a quantum mechanical simulation.
There is if the system is too complicated (like some 10^24 degrees of freedom). Anyway, the topic was not a quantum mechanical simulation but a classical one.
FrediFizzx wrote:...
I suggest that a real experiment be done using macroscopic bunches of photons as I outlined here. Most quantum labs are already setup somewhat to try to accomplish an experiment of this type. And... I suspect it will easily show the paralllelized 3-sphere character of space. Now, if it were possible to fully simulate S^3, then this should be able to be simulated on a computer also.
gill1109 wrote:Joy proposed an experiment with definitely classical physical objects. Exploding colourful hemispherical balls. That's the experiment we want to see (either performed or simulated).
FrediFizzx wrote:I guess you didn't read what I was proposing at the link. I do believe it is possible to produce macroscopic bunches of "entangled" photons right now. You just have to filter them a different way. Instead of trying to just pass single photon pairs, you have to filter to pass in-phase bunches of photons after the parametric downconverter. Experimenters are very clever. I would imagine they could figure out how to do it.
Mikko wrote:gill1109 wrote:Joy proposed an experiment with definitely classical physical objects. Exploding colourful hemispherical balls. That's the experiment we want to see (either performed or simulated).
I think it is a good idea (in this case and in general) to simulate an experiment before performing it, and to simulate several variants of the experiment. The simulations are helpful in the design of the experiment. In addition, a simulation can demostrate that the predictions of a theory differ from the predictions of another theory or of naive common sense, and consequently that the experiment would be scientifically interesting.
Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations
Users browsing this forum: ahrefs [Bot] and 253 guests