On 9/18/2011 9:27 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/18/2011 1:02, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> The *real* trick is the fact that you can create conditions
>> where you "know" what the outcome will be, instead of just looking
>> into the
>> box to find out.
>
> That's exactly what the quantum eraser does, and if you don't look at
> the result, you don't get interference. That's precisely the point I'm
> making. You get interference at time T by taking a measurement at time
> T+D, where D is a timelike separation from T.
>
Well.. Yes and no. The quantum eraser "changes the conditions" withing 
that D time frame, such that the transition to a state is interrupted, 
by inserting a new set of conditions that allow for the prior quantum 
state. Since the transition never took place, no state change happened. 
Basically, it is the equivalent of deciding, at the last possible 
instant, to not open the hypothetical box, to look inside. That you 
rigged the box lid, before hand, such that the result "must" be what you 
wanted, doesn't change the fact that you never really opened it, so your 
"rigged" conditions never came into play (or, rather, in this case, you 
jiggled the poison container, but didn't break it).

Post a reply to this message