5 ms·

Quantum Entanglement Holds DNA Together, Say Physicists

29 points by ca98am79 16y ago

joubert 16y ago
As far as I know, quantum entanglement has not been validated yet, as all experiments since Alain Aspect's 1982 paper suffer from flaws in experiment design, leading to what is known as "loopholes".
- equark 16y ago
  You're citing an article from 1982? There's been a massive amount experimental work done since the mid 1990s. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=+Experimental+quantum+teleportation&btnG=Search&as_sdt=40000000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=+Experimental+...
  - joubert 16y ago
    I said experiments since that landmark 1982 paper...
- teilo 16y ago
  Wuh...? Care to cite a source for that?
  - joubert 16y ago
    Last paragraph under history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement#History And: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopholes_in_Bell_test_experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopholes_in_Bell_test_experime...
- larsendt 16y ago
  I do believe there have been experiments that have successfully transmitted data via quantum entanglement. I don't really feel like digging up a source at the moment though.
  - Ralith 16y ago
    Wait, what? Instantaneously?
    - teilo 16y ago
      Yes. Instantaneously. Always. But this fact cannot be used to transfer information from point A to point B instantaneously. Nothing ever discovered in the weird world of quantum entanglement allows information to exceed the speed of light.
      - Ralith 16y ago
        No, I know entanglement changes are instantaneous, I just thought exactly what you're confirming; that you can't communicate with it.
  - splat 16y ago
    No data is ever transmitted via quantum entanglement (at least, data from the perspective of the observer). Entanglement is simply when two particles exist in the same quantum state. (Or, to be more precise, in the same superposition of quantum states.) When the state is observed (say, an experimenter examines one of the particles), then the entire wavefunction collapses to a single quantum state. The two particles in the system therefore collapse to the same state instantaneously, but no information can ever be transmitted in this way.
    - larsendt 16y ago
      Erm. Isn't it possible to transmit data that way, specifically by affecting the state of one particle, and observing the other?
      - Ralith 16y ago
        "Observing" is another way of saying "affecting the state of."
- aik 16y ago
  My understanding is quite limited, but I've believed this to be truth. Anyone know anything about this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-tester http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-te...
jaekwon 16y ago
AFAICT, quantum entanglement is a blanket term for unexplained magic. It would be "real" if they could use this "magic" to construct something that otherwise can't be explained by anything else. Is there proof of anything constructive coming out of quantum entanglement?
- teilo 16y ago
  Then I guess you can't tell very far. I think you are confusing measurable, reproducible quantum entanglement with the quackish invocation of the term to lend scientific credence to kooky paranormal theories. There's a reason that Einstein was freaked out by "spooky action at a distance" and it wasn't because it didn't exist. It's because it did.
  - jaekwon 16y ago
    Have you measured quantum entanglement? I'm trying to.
jlcgull 16y ago
... and in other news, pigs have grown wings and are flying! seriously, why QE? is base stacking plus some electron cloud sharing not a good enough explanation for dsDNA?
- jlcgull 16y ago
  will the anonymous downvoter please stand up and show some gumption?
  - teilo 16y ago
    From the Guidelines: "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you." http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - jlcgull 16y ago
      not complaining. just asking "why" ? i hope that is considered fair. if not, then god help HN the day i get downvoting privileges. edit: being downvoted for a comment like this i understand and agree to: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1504855 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1504855 but being downvoted without a reply for what i wrote to this thread's parent... simply makes no sense!
      - tome 16y ago
        The reason it is annoying is that 5 hours later some HN readers who actually understood your comment have upvoted your post to 4. Now your complaint is sticking around completely redundantly and this whole thread is taking up a lot of screen real-estate.
        jlcgull 16y ago
        all right, point taken. and dare i say, lesson learned. however, it does represent, at least to me, a flaw in the whole HN voting system; given that user privileges are tied to karma points, i feel that upvotes should be allowed as they are now, but downvotes __must__ require some form of response from the downvoter(s) as to why they are downvoting anything ( a la /. ). you don't need to write a paragraph explaining why you downvoted anything, but you should be required to pick at least __one__ response tag that classifies your reason for downvoting (wrong, inflammatory, trollish or whatever). anyways, sorry for taking up screen real estate with all this unneeded c.r.a.p. i better get back to "real life"[TM] and soon!
endtime 16y ago
This appears to be an instance of: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174 http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174
RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
To save you time in case you think you saw this 11 days ago - you may have done so, it was here ... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1472217 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1472217 ... but there is no discussion there.

29 points by ca98am79 16y ago

As far as I know, quantum entanglement has not been validated yet, as all experiments since Alain Aspect's 1982 paper suffer from flaws in experiment design, leading to what is known as "loopholes".

equark 16y ago
You're citing an article from 1982? There's been a massive amount experimental work done since the mid 1990s. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=+Experimental+quantum+teleportation&btnG=Search&as_sdt=40000000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=+Experimental+...
- joubert 16y ago
  I said experiments since that landmark 1982 paper...
teilo 16y ago
Wuh...? Care to cite a source for that?
- joubert 16y ago
  Last paragraph under history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement#History And: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopholes_in_Bell_test_experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopholes_in_Bell_test_experime...
larsendt 16y ago
I do believe there have been experiments that have successfully transmitted data via quantum entanglement. I don't really feel like digging up a source at the moment though.
- Ralith 16y ago
  Wait, what? Instantaneously?
  - teilo 16y ago
    Yes. Instantaneously. Always. But this fact cannot be used to transfer information from point A to point B instantaneously. Nothing ever discovered in the weird world of quantum entanglement allows information to exceed the speed of light.
    - Ralith 16y ago
      No, I know entanglement changes are instantaneous, I just thought exactly what you're confirming; that you can't communicate with it.
- splat 16y ago
  No data is ever transmitted via quantum entanglement (at least, data from the perspective of the observer). Entanglement is simply when two particles exist in the same quantum state. (Or, to be more precise, in the same superposition of quantum states.) When the state is observed (say, an experimenter examines one of the particles), then the entire wavefunction collapses to a single quantum state. The two particles in the system therefore collapse to the same state instantaneously, but no information can ever be transmitted in this way.
  - larsendt 16y ago
    Erm. Isn't it possible to transmit data that way, specifically by affecting the state of one particle, and observing the other?
    - Ralith 16y ago
      "Observing" is another way of saying "affecting the state of."
aik 16y ago
My understanding is quite limited, but I've believed this to be truth. Anyone know anything about this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-tester http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-te...

jaekwon 16y ago

AFAICT, quantum entanglement is a blanket term for unexplained magic. It would be "real" if they could use this "magic" to construct something that otherwise can't be explained by anything else. Is there proof of anything constructive coming out of quantum entanglement?

teilo 16y ago
Then I guess you can't tell very far. I think you are confusing measurable, reproducible quantum entanglement with the quackish invocation of the term to lend scientific credence to kooky paranormal theories. There's a reason that Einstein was freaked out by "spooky action at a distance" and it wasn't because it didn't exist. It's because it did.
- jaekwon 16y ago
  Have you measured quantum entanglement? I'm trying to.

jlcgull 16y ago

... and in other news, pigs have grown wings and are flying! seriously, why QE? is base stacking plus some electron cloud sharing not a good enough explanation for dsDNA?

jlcgull 16y ago
will the anonymous downvoter please stand up and show some gumption?
- teilo 16y ago
  From the Guidelines: "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you." http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - jlcgull 16y ago
    not complaining. just asking "why" ? i hope that is considered fair. if not, then god help HN the day i get downvoting privileges. edit: being downvoted for a comment like this i understand and agree to: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1504855 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1504855 but being downvoted without a reply for what i wrote to this thread's parent... simply makes no sense!
    - tome 16y ago
      The reason it is annoying is that 5 hours later some HN readers who actually understood your comment have upvoted your post to 4. Now your complaint is sticking around completely redundantly and this whole thread is taking up a lot of screen real-estate.
      - jlcgull 16y ago
        all right, point taken. and dare i say, lesson learned. however, it does represent, at least to me, a flaw in the whole HN voting system; given that user privileges are tied to karma points, i feel that upvotes should be allowed as they are now, but downvotes __must__ require some form of response from the downvoter(s) as to why they are downvoting anything ( a la /. ). you don't need to write a paragraph explaining why you downvoted anything, but you should be required to pick at least __one__ response tag that classifies your reason for downvoting (wrong, inflammatory, trollish or whatever). anyways, sorry for taking up screen real estate with all this unneeded c.r.a.p. i better get back to "real life"[TM] and soon!

endtime 16y ago

This appears to be an instance of: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174 http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174

RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago

To save you time in case you think you saw this 11 days ago - you may have done so, it was here ... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1472217 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1472217 ... but there is no discussion there.