I Why quantum wave function collapse is not consider a signal?

danielhaish
Messages
152
Reaction score
10
I read about the non-communication theorem and I understand why when changing one practical will not change the other . But suppose that there is two observers that doing the double slit experiment, but using it with two entanglement practicals. observer one should send signal of yes or no ,he would know which signal to send only in six on clock ,and the other observer knows that he should get yes no(0,1) answer at six on clock . the observer who should send the message may measure the first practical location for sending "yes" and not measure it for sending "no". and then in six on clock the other observer may check weather the electron/photon interference with it self. so basically data was send even though the observers send data before six on clock slower then the light.
of curse for checking the interference we need a lot of entanglement practicals ,so my main question is what happen if two people will do the double slit experiment, and one of them will put sensor in one of the slit and the other will not . would it block the interference in both experiences ?
by shooting the entanglement practicals one by one ,one in one observer side and the other and in secend observer side .
I also have another question what happen to two entanglement practicals in two time zones. in one of them the time going fast and in the other slow . if one of them would stop existing does the it wave function stay collapsed
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
danielhaish said:
then in six on clock the other observer may check weather the practical interfere with it self . if it does it means the message is no and if it doesn't the answer is yes
No. There is nothing he can measure locally that will tell him if the other particle has been measured.
 
  • Like
Likes danielhaish
Dale said:
No. There is nothing he can measure locally that will tell him if the other particle has been measured.
but how can one practical Interference if the possibility to go from bot side is Constance then it wouldn't go from both side
 
  • Haha
  • Skeptical
Likes Demystifier and Motore
You are talking about interferences. Are you sure that Bob and Alice see interferences if the pair is maximally entangled?
 
danielhaish said:
but how can one practical Interference if the possibility to go from bot side is Constance then it wouldn't go from both side
This is unintelligible. Please write more carefully. Use proper English to the absolute best of your ability, and more importantly be clear about exactly what measurement you are trying to describe.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, Motore and Demystifier
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top