LESSWRONG
LW

All of tward248's Comments + Replies

Athens, GA – ACX Meetups Everywhere 2021
tward24810

If you are reading this before the event, I am set up outside the garden club green space.

Reply
Don’t Fear The Filter
tward24810

Interesting. It seems that although entanglement breaking the speed of light is technically untrue, we could make these inferences 'as if' they were quicker than the speed of light. Instead of measuring the differences between the states of the two items, we're able to make that inference instantly. So although it's not faster than the speed of light, our measurements operate as though they were. 

I think my misunderstanding comes from the inability to put this operation into practice. But as per my original argument, if electrons were simply more conc... (read more)

Reply
Focusmate: Cryonics sign up
tward24810

Pissed I missed this. Hope it went well. 

Reply
3Mati_Roy
it did; we were 6; I will make it weekly
Don’t Fear The Filter
tward24810

Thanks for linking this. Seems like I was arguing from an incorrect premise. What sources do you know of where I can learn/understand more about quantum theory?

Reply
3TurnTrout
An entangled quantum state is one which cannot be written as the tensor product of two pure states. Imagine I prepare two objects whose states are quantum-entangled; suppose they either both say '0' or '1', but they can't disagree, and we don't know beforehand. We each take an object and go our separate ways.  A day later, I decide to "measure" the state of my object. This basically just means I get to find out whether it says '0' or '1'. I find out it says '0'. This allows me to deduce that when you measure your object, yours will also say '0'.  But this isn't sending information 'faster than light' or 'instantly' or anything strange like that. The quantum superposition was between the |0⟩⊗|0⟩ and |1⟩⊗|1⟩ states, and when I measured the state of my object, I "found out" which world I was in. Then, I inferred what you would see if you peeked. We can construct a classical example of a similar kind of "faster-than-light" inference. Consider a closed system of two objects of equal mass, which were earlier at rest together before spontaneously pushing off of each other (maybe we intervened to make this happen, whatever). We aren't sure about their velocities, but when we learn the velocity v of one object, we immediately know that the velocity of the other is −v by conservation of momentum. Under these assumptions, the velocity of one object logically determines the velocity of the other object, but does not cause the other object to have the opposite velocity. (I'm not a physicist, but if you want to learn the math of basic quantum theory, I recommend Nielsen and Chuang)
Highlights From The Comments On Cost Disease
tward24810

Regarding the NRC, I think regulation is justified in mitigating the risks that are extremely devastating. For instance, mandating zoning specifications that reduce the spread of potential nuclear waste runoff, requiring maintenance protocols, quality assurance, etc. of all the transport processes inside and out of the plant. 

In conclusion, I think these measures, though resulting in a significant increase in costs, justify the widespread disasters that could ensue at each stage. Were these not to be in place, there's no doubt construction and perform... (read more)

Reply
Don’t Fear The Filter
tward24810

Correct. It doesn't violate the limit yet they communicate as though they were violating it. It achieves communication by different means scarcely understood. We can achieve accurate predictions using entanglement. Information can be currently be communicated through qubits in quantum computers. 

Reply
0Dirichlet-to-Neumann
What are you talking about ? What has quantum computing to do with faster than light travel ? Entangled particle "communicate with each other instantly", but the no-communication theorem is a well known result in quantum mechanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem) that shows that entanglement can not be used to transmit information (i.e. messages or matter) faster than light.
Don’t Fear The Filter
tward24810

Right, you are correct, as the our current theoretical understanding puts it. It could still be the case that this speed limit is imposed, but the goal of reaching point B from point A is still actualized.

What Einstein Got Wrong About the Speed of Light | Time

Reply
1Dirichlet-to-Neumann
As far as I am aware entanglement does not violate Einstein's rule, as no information is transmitted between entangled particles - you can not use entanglement to transmit information faster than light. So no "quantum teleportation" is possible (and anyway entanglement requires the actual particles to travel and they can not do this faster than light either).
1[comment deleted]
Don’t Fear The Filter
tward24810

I think your analysis relies on the assumption that the Einsteinian speed limit is definite, which by current run of the mill physics, geometric unity is up in the air. So whether this is possible could be a break-point, but technological maturity could still break this barrier in forms of entanglement, for instance, granted this is not constrained by the 'ultimate physics' of the universe. 

Reply
1Dirichlet-to-Neumann
I'm not sure I understand exactly what you say, but given my understanding of current physics the speed of light is a hard barrier in the general relativistic framework, and one that is unlikely to be overturned, because any new theoretical physic should have relativity as a special case (just like Newtonian mechanic is a special case of relativity where you can consider v/c=0.