Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Quantum physics just got less complicated
PhysOrg ^ | 12/19/14

Posted on 12/19/2014 11:34:49 AM PST by LibWhacker

Here's a nice surprise: quantum physics is less complicated than we thought. An international team of researchers has proved that two peculiar features of the quantum world previously considered distinct are different manifestations of the same thing. The result is published 19 December in Nature Communications.

Patrick Coles, Jedrzej Kaniewski, and Stephanie Wehner made the breakthrough while at the Centre for Quantum Technologies at the National University of Singapore. They found that 'wave-particle duality' is simply the quantum '' in disguise, reducing two mysteries to one.

"The connection between uncertainty and wave-particle duality comes out very naturally when you consider them as questions about what information you can gain about a system. Our result highlights the power of thinking about physics from the perspective of information," says Wehner, who is now an Associate Professor at QuTech at the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands.

The discovery deepens our understanding of and could prompt ideas for new applications of wave-particle duality.

Wave-particle duality is the idea that a can behave like a wave, but that the wave behaviour disappears if you try to locate the object. It's most simply seen in a , where single particles, electrons, say, are fired one by one at a screen containing two narrow slits. The particles pile up behind the slits not in two heaps as classical objects would, but in a stripy pattern like you'd expect for waves interfering. At least this is what happens until you sneak a look at which slit a particle goes through - do that and the interference pattern vanishes.

The quantum uncertainty principle is the idea that it's impossible to know certain pairs of things about a at once. For example, the more precisely you know the position of an atom, the less precisely you can know the speed with which it's moving. It's a limit on the fundamental knowability of nature, not a statement on measurement skill. The new work shows that how much you can learn about the wave versus the particle behaviour of a system is constrained in exactly the same way.

<p>

Wave-particle duality and uncertainty have been fundamental concepts in quantum physics since the early 1900s. "We were guided by a gut feeling, and only a gut feeling, that there should be a connection," says Coles, who is now a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Institute for Quantum Computing in Waterloo, Canada.

It's possible to write equations that capture how much can be learned about pairs of properties that are affected by the uncertainty principle. Coles, Kaniewski and Wehner are experts in a form of such equations known as 'entropic uncertainty relations', and they discovered that all the maths previously used to describe wave-particle duality could be reformulated in terms of these relations.

"It was like we had discovered the 'Rosetta Stone' that connected two different languages," says Coles. "The literature on wave-particle duality was like hieroglyphics that we could now translate into our native tongue. We had several eureka moments when we finally understood what people had done," he says.

Because the entropic uncertainty relations used in their translation have also been used in proving the security of quantum cryptography - schemes for secure communication using quantum particles - the researchers suggest the work could help inspire new cryptography protocols.

In earlier papers, Wehner and collaborators found connections between the uncertainty principle and other physics, namely quantum 'non-locality' and the second law of thermodynamics. The tantalising next goal for the researchers is to think about how these pieces fit together and what bigger picture that paints of how nature is constructed.


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: duality; particle; physics; quantum; stringtheory; uncertainty; wave
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
To: LibWhacker

How does a particle know what we think? Strange. :)


21 posted on 12/19/2014 11:58:20 AM PST by itsahoot (Voting for a Progressive RINO is the same as voting for any other Tyrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingcrazy

“That was my understanding from college, decades ago. I suppose they formalized the connection.”

Yes:

It’s possible to write equations that capture how much can be learned about pairs of properties that are affected by the uncertainty principle. Coles, Kaniewski and Wehner are experts in a form of such equations known as ‘entropic uncertainty relations’, and they discovered that all the maths previously used to describe wave-particle duality could be reformulated in terms of these relations.


22 posted on 12/19/2014 11:59:20 AM PST by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker; SunkenCiv
thanks, for the ping/post...
Science Ping!

23 posted on 12/19/2014 12:00:46 PM PST by skinkinthegrass ("Bathhouse" E'Bola/0'Boehmer/0'McConnell; all STINK and their best friends are flies. d8^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

Proving the irresolvability of the most persistent duality of life, namely, What do women really want?

Rather than a duality, that would be more like an infinite superposition of possibilities. You could know precisely what one would want, or when she wanted it, but not at the same time.


24 posted on 12/19/2014 12:00:47 PM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Irony:

Scientists that base their calculations on the “uncertainty principle” ridiculing the Christian faith.


25 posted on 12/19/2014 12:01:06 PM PST by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: verga

Piong for later


26 posted on 12/19/2014 12:01:10 PM PST by verga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

“because Speaker of the House Mr. (No-)Boner protects O”

1. No impeachment would get a democratic senate approval.

2. Who would go through that tortured ordeal just to get Biden as president.


27 posted on 12/19/2014 12:01:27 PM PST by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

tell them to use the new math of common core and I bet they’ll find the answer in no time.


28 posted on 12/19/2014 12:01:42 PM PST by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Ah. Back to the books.


29 posted on 12/19/2014 12:02:34 PM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Well, duuuuuh!


30 posted on 12/19/2014 12:03:25 PM PST by bgill (CDC site, "we still do not know exactly how people are infected with Ebola")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker; 6SJ7; AdmSmith; AFPhys; Arkinsaw; allmost; aristotleman; autumnraine; bajabaja; ...
Thanks LibWhacker.

· String Theory Ping List ·
Sorry we re open
· Join · Bookmark · Topics · Google ·
· View or Post in 'blog · post a topic · subscribe ·


31 posted on 12/19/2014 12:08:13 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/ _____________________ Celebrate the Polls, Ignore the Trolls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Grrr. I was writing a paper on this (no joke). Ok, going back to the one on time dilation, black holes, and why singularities don’t exist.

/I have wierd aka geek hobbies


32 posted on 12/19/2014 12:09:30 PM PST by piytar (No government has ever wanted its people to be defenseless for any good reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingcrazy

“Ah. Back to the books.”

My quantum physics courses were forty years ago. I have no hope of catching up.


33 posted on 12/19/2014 12:09:46 PM PST by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rightwingcrazy

I stand corrected but, only if money is removed as a variable.


34 posted on 12/19/2014 12:11:35 PM PST by outofsalt ( If history teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

Biden told Gore how to invent it.


35 posted on 12/19/2014 12:11:44 PM PST by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
They found that 'wave-particle duality' is simply the quantum 'uncertainty principle' in disguise, reducing two mysteries to one.

Nothing new here... my prof taught that to me in college 23 years ago, LOL!

36 posted on 12/19/2014 12:12:25 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (Blog: www.BackwoodsEngineer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Long story short: the cat is definitely dead.


37 posted on 12/19/2014 12:14:06 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Democrats have a lynch mob mentality. They always have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingcrazy

Why don’t they just answer both questions rather than dink around with the semantics?


38 posted on 12/19/2014 12:14:18 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Huh? Isn’t this what’s been understood for decades?


39 posted on 12/19/2014 12:21:42 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Ah...here’s the important part:

It’s possible to write equations that capture how much can be learned about pairs of properties that are affected by the uncertainty principle. Coles, Kaniewski and Wehner are experts in a form of such equations known as ‘entropic uncertainty relations’, and they discovered that all the maths previously used to describe wave-particle duality could be reformulated in terms of these relations.


40 posted on 12/19/2014 12:22:51 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson