Comments on: Gravity Wave Detection Using Entanglement?

By: Paul Valletta

Paul Valletta — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 20:41:12 +0000

“Making matter exist in a “PURE-STATE” is simply what must be achieved, any particle that is entangled, MUST be shielded from everything that could influence or collapse the state into a “non-entangled” system. The whole basis of Entanglement and superposition is that if one creates a “table-top” experiment, that is entanglement, then the two particle state is, whilst it exists, classed as the only things in existence, as far as those particles are concerned , nothing else in the “UNIVERSE” Exists?”

Thus, that includes any DETECTOR/OBSERVER!

By: Paul Valletta

Paul Valletta — Sun, 28 May 2006 23:57:49 +0000

Two papers that give clue’s:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0111058

is the first step, and this:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0605227

is the authors latest paper.

By: Plato

Plato — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:58:03 +0000

Strominger:

That was the problem we had to solve. In order to count microstates, you need a microscopic theory. Boltzmann had oneâ€"the theory of molecules. We needed a microscopic theory for black holes that had to have three characteristics: One, it had to include quantum mechanics. Two, it obviously had to include gravity, because black holes are the quintessential gravitational objects. And three, it had to be a theory in which we would be able to do the hard computations of strong interactions. I say strong interactions because the forces inside a black hole are large, and whenever you have a system in which forces are large it becomes hard to do a calculation.

By: Plato

Plato — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:50:16 +0000

In Kaku’s preface of Hyperspace, page ix, we find a innocent enough statement that helps us orientate a view that previous to all understanding, is counched in the work of Kaluza.

In para 3, he writes,

Similarily, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and grvaity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained inthe fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.

By: Count Iblis

Count Iblis — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:49:34 +0000

Clifford:

“Weird” and “spooky” imply -to the outsider- that there is something central that is not understood about how Quantum Mechanics works, when in fact we can compute results with it to remarkable accuracy. (Notice that I did not use the word “why” in the previous sentence, but “how”.)

What about the measurement problem? What is not understood is how to deal with quantum mechanical observers. The way QM is formulated rules out non-classical observers and is thus incomplete. Although one can argue that observers need to be large, you can in principle make intelligent quantum computers.

By: Plato

Plato — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:39:02 +0000

If your dealing with a 5d world there are certain assmptions you make? Even from a supersymmetrical point of view, it is tied together microscopically as well as macroscopically?

A black hole is an object so massive that even light cannot escape from it. This requires the idea of a gravitational mass for a photon, which then allows the calculation of an escape energy for an object of that mass. When the escape energy is equal to the photon energy, the implication is that the object is a “black hole”.

By: Paul Valletta

Paul Valletta — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:25:24 +0000

Missed another link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_star

Which ties in neatly with the Count’s Post!

By: Paul Valletta

Paul Valletta — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:19:12 +0000

Cynthia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-statistics_theorem

can be elaborated further?

All things having “already” been washed by GW’s, and thus fixed by expansion. Contraction of say a Bose-Nova(squeezed state), will reveal interesting properties regarding the GW’s signals.

Finite measure is achievable via local “Quantum TO Macro” paramiters, not “Macro to Quantum” !

By: Count Iblis

Count Iblis — Sun, 28 May 2006 16:09:50 +0000

Intersting article! Some time ago I read an article about the possibility of using light from stars to detect gravitational waves:

Detection of gravity waves by phase modulation of the light from a distant star

We propose a novel method for detecting gravitational waves (GW), where a light signal emitted from a distant star interacts with a local (also distant) GW source and travels towards the Earth, where it is detected. While traveling in the field of the GW, the light acquires specific phase modulation (which we account in the eikonal approximation). This phase modulation can be considered as a coherent spreading of the given initial photons energy over a set of satellite lines, spaced at the frequency of GW (from quantum point of view it is multi-graviton absorption and emission processes). This coherent state of photons with the energy distributed among the set of equidistant lines, can be analyzed and identified on Earth either by passing the signal through a Fabry-Perot filter or by monitoring the intensity-intensity correlations at different times.

By: Cynthia

Cynthia — Sun, 28 May 2006 14:41:19 +0000

Paul Valletta - if you are still making contact with this thread…

Perhaps there is a solution to the underlying “chicken and egg” problem in regards to the origins of entanglement and superpositioning… If one assumes the “tightly-bound, Pre-Bang” condition as having pure-state entanglement, then superpositioning can be viewed as an emergent feature of the expanding cosmos. Therefore, as the universe evolves with expansion, superpositioning “kicks-in” to create mixed-state entanglement.