h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Thanks xyroth - especially the point about the black holes. That's the kind of thing I don't know.

If I do a literature or library search of "weak measurement" will I get to this topic?

dave

a google search returns lots of relevent results, so looking it up shouldn't be a problem.

Yo!

Comming back to the EPR proposition, and the Entry...

I dumbed the Entry down a bit. Maybe it is easier to understand the EPR problem now?

As to Nonlocality versus hidden variables: Bell's theorem is nice, but a more thorough description of that would shift the center of gravity of the Entry to a too different topic. Please coment if you think otherwise.

BTW: Nonlocality (quantum & statistics) doesn't debunk hidden variables (classical & deterministic), as there are in hypothesis infinite levels of 'hiddenness' A hidden variables supporter will always say: "Yeah, but there's another hidden variable behind this one" - A quantum-geek will not be able to prove him wrong...

HELL

Looks good. One quick thing - you repeated a sentence. Under the EPR proposition, under "the so called paradox", end of paragraph 3, you mention the real life experimental example of "gamma-photon into a positron and an electron"

you also mention this later in the "Verifying the EPR-proposition with experiments" section - you can probably just leave it out the first time.

I'm going to re-read it to make sure I understand it

dave

okay...

So what's happening with this, I don't like entries like this languishing in the depths of PR...

I re-read it and it seems clear to me. I think a few minor changes might be needed. These are the ones I thought of:

under "Verifying the EPR proposition with experiments", 2nd paragraph:
The sentence:
"However, turning one particle around will not affect the other one. The switch and the lamp are one-way. The switch will only work properly for one time"

Do you mean that further experiments/actions on one of the particles will not affect the other? If this is so, maybe you could say that the particles become dis-entangled after the measurement. "the switch will only be affected by the lamp one time" might be clearer also.

under "Crutch two: Hidden Variables"
Instead of saying "or if stuff uses nonlocality" you might want to say "or if the effect is caused by nonlocality".

Also under the section on review of QM, you might want to link a certain entry on quantum mechanics A781823

dave

Hell,

I've just re-read this and although I love the link to 'life, the Universe and everything, you won't be allowed to keep it in. Jims put something on both the scouts' and sub-editors' e-groups to this effect (not about your entry, but linking to general categories).

There are also some minor typos to be fixed:

at the outcome1 > at the outcome1.

gedanken - needs to be in italics

'communicates' it's state > 'communicates' its state

ultimatively exact way > ultimately exact way

unsing this immediate > using this immediate

"That the guiding ... of quantum mechanics..." > single quotation marks

see the coind > see the coins (in a footnote)

Thanks ZSF! Done.

HELL

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Thanks a lot.

HELL

congrats hell!

Coo, that was quick! Congratulations, Hell!

H

Hi Hell

I know it's already accepted, but did you get a chance to look at the suggestions I made above? I'm just curious, if my understanding is wrong, I'd like to know.

dave

This is its new A number A2350216. I don't think it's been allocated yet, however doubtless the sub will check the thread, so any last minute amendments can be included.

Hi dave...

Yes. I agree with you. "Do you mean that further experiments/actions on one of the particles will not affect the other? If this is so, maybe you could say that the particles become dis-entangled after the measurement. the switch will only be affected by the lamp one time" might be clearer also." I think this is kinda clear from the Entry, but maybe I'll double check that with the subbie.

Next point: "Instead of saying "or if stuff uses nonlocality" you might want to say "or if the effect is caused by nonlocality". I'd rather stick to the more colloquial language, I don't want the entire Entry to be too straight serious - However, I doubt any non-geek will read, understand and/or ejoy this one. What the heck. Also, this kind of grinding is usually done by the subbie anyways.

Finally: "Also under the section on review of QM, you might want to link a certain entry on quantum mechanics A781823" It's linked already, no? (I love that Entry BTW!) I have just linked it once and not all the 'fifty' times I mention QM. And again, this is one of the things that the subbies take care of, and they do it way better than me, e.g. put the link where it's most appropriate etc. They often also find other pertinent/interesting links.

Well... I think the Entry is now in good hands. I hope this is alright with you, dave. Let's wait for a semi-final version of the Entry and then see again.

HELL

thanks Hell, I take your points. I missed the link to QM, right under my nose in the beginning! Thanks for that too.

dave

No way! Thank *YOU*, dave.

Yo, dave, you're around in h2g2 on saturday? How's the weather, over there?

HELL

yeah, I'm actually in working at lab. Weather is awesome here today, really warm. It was a nice walk in. I'm procastinating badly, but I figure I'll get a little something done today at least. How's the weather where you are? You're in Germany right?