Bell's theorem proof. Does it really proofs anything?

DevilsAvocado

Part one or two?

DevilsAvocado

Nope!

The problem here is that from the perspective of observer Chris, Alice will always measure her photons first, thus Alice is not forced by any rules of EPRB to make correlations with Bob. Alice should always have random 50/50 evenly spread out.

From the perspective of observer Dave, Bob will always measure his photons first, thus Bob is not forced by any rules of EPRB to make correlations with Alice. Bob should always have random 50/50 evenly spread out.

This is pure madness!!

Get it??

0xDEAD BEEF

Ok ok!
0xDEAD BEEF: "Bubuubibeebuu. Bububeee! Babubabubee?"
DevilsAvocado: "Eat this porridge son, it is good for your teeth!"

;)

I really would like to understand this case, because - i have come up with one cool experiment. And i, of courese, will share it with you (but only, if it makes sense)!

So - my question still remains - where is the catch! What is the difference between simple photons having same polarization, but not linked together and twin photons?

In fact - here is my idea:

--- simple case ---
Polairty of two photons is same before they enter Anna's and Bob's polarity detectors. Those photons were generated by our black-box, which generates 2 photons having same polarization, BUT, to match experiment with twin-photons, we have placed our apparatus in black box, so no one can actually see, what is that polarization of those photons.

--- wtf is going on case ---
twin-photons, same polarization (maybe) hitting Anna's and Bob's detectors.

As I understand - it does not matter, what was polarization of those two photons (but it was same), BUT after Annas detector photon has changed. But - it is still not determined, because, if it would be, then this case would be same as "simple case".

Now - the funky experiment which allows data to be exchanged faster than light. (Of course not!, but just idea).

So - let's have this configuration -

Bob has same detector as allways and he is measuring photon orientation at 45 degrees.
Anna has boosted her detector! Instead of one detector, she has 3 detectors(not 3 detectors but 4! she has 3 polarization crustals) with same angle now.
So -
first photon hits Anna's A detector (set at angle 0), next it hits Bob's detector (45). Now - here the tricky part - Anna has 2 more detectors after detector A. She has detector A1 and A2. These detectors are exactly same as detector A, but they are located so in time, that photon first hits A, then B, then A1/A2.

Anna's detector setup would look like this
A1+
A1-
.....A
A2+
A2-


So - what we would expect is, that Anna almost allways gets either A1+ or A2-. How ever - if this all strange quantum stuff is reall, then as soon as Bob turns his detector away from 0 (same as Anna), Anna should start receiving also (more than before) A1- and/or A2+.

This would be totaly cool. I agree! Faster than light communication!

However - would that happen? If no. What is the difference betwen twin-photons and simple photons with same polarization?
Beefs

0xDEAD BEEF

here picture.
- goes down,
+ goes up

So - does this theory says, that after Bobs measurement (taking place in time between A and A1/A2) we could get A1- or A2+ or we allways will see A1+ or A2-

EDIT: it would make more sense to call A1 A+ and A2 A- :)

Attached Thumbnails

 

DevilsAvocado

0xDEAD BEEF: "Bubuubibeebuu. Bububeee! Babubabubee?"
DevilsAvocado: "Eat this dead beef son, it is good for your teeth!"



With two photons that have a fixed polarization from start, this will happen (at best! ):

Alice polarized 0º
Bob polarized 0º

Alice hit the detector at 0º, and she passes thru 100% of the time.
Bob hit the detector at 30º, and he passes thru 75% of the time.

The relative angle between Alice & Bob is 30º and the mismatch is 25% which seems OK, right?

Next test:

Alice hit the detector at 30º, and she passes thru 75% of the time.
Bob hit the detector at 60º, and he passes thru 25% of the time.

The relative angle between Alice & Bob is now also 30º... but the mismatch is now 50%!? This is not OK!

Babubabubee? Get it?

0xDEAD BEEF

Thats because you were firing photons at angle about 0.
To be honest - i dont get it. If i would - would i start this wierd (nonsense) topic from very begining? By the way - what do you think of my experiment setup with 3 polarizers and 4 detectors at Anna's place?
Beef
Edit: Nope - i got your experiment! That was exactly what my program outputed. Only - i tried out all different options of photon polarization. Now the question is - where is the catch!

DevilsAvocado

What is it?? Julian Assange’s contact network!?

(terribly sorry, extremely bad joke! )

DevilsAvocado

The catch (that I have tried to inform you for TWO WHOLE DAYS) is – QM does not behave in the expected classical way, it’s weird; 1 + 1 = 3!! ()

Seriously, I have to leave now. You've got some reading to do. I’m sure it will come to you.

Good luck and Cheers!

0xDEAD BEEF

Ha ha! (irony, but maybe not).

So, how i see this-
Anna got polarization filter and Bob has. Standart setup.
What if we further extend this setup, so that Anna has 3 polarization filters all set at same angle.

So, Anna would have 4 detectors. 2 for each "second" filter like this -
dA++
........ pA+
dA+-
........
........................ pA
........
dA-+
........ pA-
dA--

So pA (first polarization filter) decides polarization and redirects photon to either pA+ or pA- polarization filters. In the mean time twin-photon hits Bob's polarizer, which is set at 45 degree angle.
If we forget about this QM wierd stuf, no mater what/when/ever second twin-photon hit Bob's polarization filter, Anna should always get either dA-- or dA++, because, if photon once choose to go through Anna's 0 polarizer in + direction (up), why shoul it choose differnetly, when facing second one pA+ (or vice versa - facing pA-).

In this case standart physics predict, that Anna should only get dA-- or dA++ output! How ever - if this QM stuff is real and Bob's detector has given new properties to photon, while it was traveling through Bob's polarizer set at very different angle than Anna's was - we should see Anna's dA-+ and dA+- detectors fire as well!

This really would prove everything! Scienitifcal brekathrough - i would say. Otherwise... sorry guys, but we are just creating our own virtual reality to play with (wich ain't that bad, since we can learn new thing from it as well).

Beef

DevilsAvocado

@0xDEAD BEEF

Maybe unfair to leave in an "outburst" like that... you did ask me a specific question...

The "catch" (that your predefined photon polarization will never ever work), is because the relative angle between Alice & Bob can be anything between 0-360, but "your" photons doesn’t care one bit about this relative angle. The only thing that they will "respond" to is their own polarization and the setting of their own polarizer.

I.e. there is no "communication" or "link" between Alice & Bob in your "design", and this is crucial.

Don’t ask what this "communication" or "link" really is and how this works – no one knows.

There are two main "explanations" for this paradox. One is the so called non-locality, meaning some sort of "communication" between Alice & Bob is present (that we don’t know what it is). The other is non-separability, which means that the physical reality is not what we think; one object can be at two places at once, or something like that (I think it involves holism as well).

This is why I won’t get into details in your program; I know it will never work they way you hope. Yes, it’s "cocky and rough", but it’s the truth. You will win some substantial time if you first study the problem in detail, to learn everything, and then try to build something on your own. Just by guessing, you will not get anywhere.

Good luck & Take care!

DrChinese

If they are all set the same way, you can pretty well predict the results. Same all around, as any polarized photon can be sent through a series of similarly oriented splitters and nothing changes.

It would be helpful if you would ask a specific question. You are wandering all over the place and it seems as you ignore the rules I keep trying to explain. There is difference between entangled photons (emerging from a PDC crystal) and a pair of photons of known and identical polarization, such as emerge directly from a laser beam. You should learn this difference first, and understand their statistics.

zonde

I suppose that you mean you don't know polarization axis of photons (and they have different polarizations) not polarizers i.e. black-box is source not measurement equipment.
If that is so then you will have classical output like that:
N(a,b)=1/4+1/2*cos^2(a-b)

If we want to look at real life example we can take PDC source without walkoff compensators.
In that case we have only H and V polarized non-entangled photons. And result is like this:
N(a,b)=1/2*cos^2(a)*cos^2(b)+1/2*sin^2(a)*sin^2(b)

0xDEAD BEEF

What is PDC source with with walkoff compensators?
Yes - my black box device would be photon source which would output two photons to Anna and Bob. These two photons would have same polarization (photon a polarization == photon b polarization), but those polarizations would change on random (photon a == photon b == random value).
Beef

0xDEAD BEEF

So QM states, that particle can have only one "property" at time?
For example - i send p (particle) through 0 angle polarizer. It goes either up or down and now it has its 0 angle property set to up or down. Then (p) travels through another polarizer, this time set at 90 angle, so particle now forgets? its 0 angle and decides either to go up or down at 90 angle. And now if i send this particle through 0 angle polarizer again, then it could choose different direction to go this time, because previously it was measured against 90 angle detector???

Example:


p --> (0) -- up/down --> (90) -- up/down --> (0) -- same as first time or different??? --> (detector).

EDIT:
What i am aiming at is:
a) photons have some invisible quantum bound between them.
In such case (time line):
Alisa measures photon polarization at angle 0
Bob measures twin-photon polarization at angle 90
Alisa again measures photon polarization at angle 0, but gets different result, since Bob's measurement on his photon has made Alisa's photon to "forget" it's 0 angle polarization value.
Result - faster than light information exchange.
Setup (Alisa) -
where BOB90 has 50% chance of firing, if Bob's polarizer is set at 90 degrees and 0% percent chance, when Bob's polarizer is at 0 degrees.

b) we are just measuring different properties of photon.
In such case (time line):
Alisa measures photon polarization at angle 0
Bob measures photon polarization at angle 90
Alisa measures photon polarization at angle 90
Bob measures photon polarization at angle 0
-- Bob's and Alisa's all 4 measurements match, so there is actually no reason to have Bob at all and Alisa could have measured photon both on 0 and 90 angle bu her self.
Setup would be -
So - if Alisa's D0+90- fires, that means, that photon had 0+ polarization and 90-.
If we have Bob in this scenario, then D0+90- or D0-90- should fire, when Bobs (90 angle) - fires and vice versa.

EDIT2:
I guess, there is also c) option.
c) Alisa can measure photon's polarization at one angle (and that is it), and Bob can also do so, so they both can measure different polarization values of "same" photon, which is cool, since we get more information about that photon, but that is it .

EDIT3:
There might also be option d).
Alisa measures her photon at 0 angle, so Bob's photon now can not be longer measured against 90 angle and vice versa.
Twin-photon hits Bob's polarizer always first.
In this case Alisa could have multiple detector chain
so - if Bob DOES NOT measure his twin-photon polarization angle at 90, then Alisa always gets BOB0. If, however, Bob does measure his twin-photon's polarization before Alisa's photon enters Alisa's first polarizer p(0), then Alisa's photon starts giving random data when measured against p(0), so it should start hitting BOB1 detectors. In this case we would again clearly see at Alisa's end, that Bob has measured his photon (at 90) or has not, thus, we could make conclusion about Bob's setup -> faster than light information exchange.

------
So is it a), b), c) or d) ???

Sincerely,
Beef

zonde

It is usual source of polarization entangle photons.
Then I understood you correctly and my answers hold.

zonde

Different
Only if you talk about photons and polarizers then it's 0° and 45° not 0° and 90°. Photons that pass 0° polarizer are completely blocked by 90° polarizer.

No
No, because after first measurement photons are not entangled any more.
I would rather say no. It's not photon that behaves the same way. It's the wavefunction that behaves the same way. So you don't get more information about the "same" photon.No, because after first measurement photons are not entangled any more.
And you always get BOB0 irrespective of Bob's measurement.

0xDEAD BEEF

So you are saying, that after first measurement photons are not entangled any more. If so - does it matter at all that they were entangled from very beginning.

Or maybe i am just getting this wrong, but - does entanglement gives any other extra properties to photons than just that they have all same properties?

In this experiment they use that crystal to create entangled photons with same polarization and send them to Alisa and Bob. Why would it make any difference if i replace "twin-photon crystal" with "black box", which also outputs same photons, only with difference, that they are "manually created" (two "light bulbs" and bunch of polarization filters) .

?