Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.
Résultats trouvés sur Google Books
Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
The phenomenon that Einstein thought too spooky and strange to be true What is entanglement? It's a connection between quantum particles, the building blocks of the universe. Once two particles are entangled, a change to one of them is reflected---instantly---in the other, be they in the same lab or light-years apart. So counterintuitive is this phenomenon and its implications that Einstein himself called it "spooky" and thought that it would lead to the downfall of quantum theory. Yet scientists have since discovered that quantum entanglement, the "God Effect," was one of Einstein's few---and perhaps one of his greatest---mistakes. What does it mean? The possibilities offered by a fuller understanding of the nature of entanglement read like something out of science fiction: communications devices that could span the stars, codes that cannot be broken, computers that dwarf today's machines in speed and power, teleportation, and more. InThe God Effect, veteran science writer Brian Clegg has written an exceptionally readable and fascinating (and equation-free) account of entanglement, its history, and its application. Fans of Brian Greene and Amir Aczel and those interested in the marvelous possibilities coming down the quantum physics road will find much to marvel, illuminate, and delight.… (plus d'informations)
Poorly written at times and in need of proofreading. Good introduction to quantum entanglement that is already somewhat dated because it was written prior to the discovery of the Higgs Boson.
I could have skipped some of the far more speculative and fanciful aspects as well as the cringe-worthy pop culture references. ( )
The title involving God says it all: to the author quantum entanglement is a supernatural phenomenon beyond our comprehension, somehow mysteriously linked to extra dimensions and the Higgs boson. Little judgement is shown in separating the experimental reality of quantum non-locality from wild speculations in all directions. Good references, but little to be learned here. ( )
The opening chapters set up the discovery of quantum entanglement, which occurred during the professional debate between Max Bohr and Albert Einstein as they discussed the nature of quantum physics. Clegg then provides historical understanding and the potential applications of entanglement to advance current technologies. Those chapters read like a science-fiction novel–an unbreakable secure communications system, teleportation, and supercomputers that think all become possibilities. The author's writing is well organized and succinct. Later chapters can be read independently. While the foundation for quantum entanglement may be difficult for some students to grasp, its potential will fascinate them.
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais.Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
To Gillian, Rebecca, and Chelsea
Premiers mots
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais.Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
If you thought science was a predictable, commonsense business—maybe even a little dull—you haven't encountered quantum entanglement.
Citations
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais.Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
[Max] Born [. . .] brought into quantum theory the apparently simple concept that would cause Einstein and others so much trouble—probability. To make Schrödinger's wave equations sensibly map onto the observed world, he suggested that they did not describe how an electron (for instance) moves, or the nature of an electron as an entity, but rather provided a description of the probability that an electron would be in a particular place. The equations weren't a distinct picture of an electron but a fuzzy map of its likely locations. It was as if he had moved our image of the world from an accurate modern atlas to a medieval muddle with areas labeled "here be electrons."
In the normal world, spin momentum is the momentum of a body spinning on its own axis. Carried away by the picture of something that moved like the earth going around the sun, the theorists imagined this new property that particles could have was due to the electron spinning on its axis. It isn't. They could just as easily have called the property saltiness or bounce or frangibility, but they decided to call it spin.
Quantum entanglement experimenters seem to have a functional relationship with the sewage system rivaled only by utility workers and Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
When we describe light or an electron as a wave or a particle, what we really mean is that we are using the model of waves (like the actual, real ripples we see on the sea) or the model of particles (like a stream of very, very tiny bits of dust). But what shouldn't be implied is that light or an electron is a wave or that it is a particle. Attractive though it is to have something that we are familiar with to hang on to, we always have to remember that we are dealing with a model, not the real thing.
What is light or an electron, then? Light is light. An electron is an electron. They happen to exhibit strong similarities to waves and particles some of the time, which can be very useful when we are trying to predict what they will do, but that isn't what they are. If you can take the step of seeing this, the whole concern about quantum theory is better put in proportion. The only reason the behavior of a photon appearing to pass through two slits at once, or entanglement working at any distance, is odd, is that we are letting the models take over, giving them more weight than they deserve.
This doesn't make all speculation worthless, though. Not only can it produce new and wonderful ideas—arguably all modern physics originates from a handful of vibrant speculations that challenged traditional science at the start of the twentieth century—but it can result in a very healthy shaking up of what can otherwise be entrenched and self-satisfied thinking.
Derniers mots
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais.Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
There can be little doubt that quantum entanglement, the God Effect, is the next big thing.
The phenomenon that Einstein thought too spooky and strange to be true What is entanglement? It's a connection between quantum particles, the building blocks of the universe. Once two particles are entangled, a change to one of them is reflected---instantly---in the other, be they in the same lab or light-years apart. So counterintuitive is this phenomenon and its implications that Einstein himself called it "spooky" and thought that it would lead to the downfall of quantum theory. Yet scientists have since discovered that quantum entanglement, the "God Effect," was one of Einstein's few---and perhaps one of his greatest---mistakes. What does it mean? The possibilities offered by a fuller understanding of the nature of entanglement read like something out of science fiction: communications devices that could span the stars, codes that cannot be broken, computers that dwarf today's machines in speed and power, teleportation, and more. InThe God Effect, veteran science writer Brian Clegg has written an exceptionally readable and fascinating (and equation-free) account of entanglement, its history, and its application. Fans of Brian Greene and Amir Aczel and those interested in the marvelous possibilities coming down the quantum physics road will find much to marvel, illuminate, and delight.
▾Descriptions provenant de bibliothèques
Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque
▾Description selon les utilisateurs de LibraryThing
Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku
Auteur LibraryThing
Brian Clegg est un auteur LibraryThing, c'est-à-dire un auteur qui catalogue sa bibliothèque personnelle sur LibraryThing.
)
)
Google Books — Chargement...
(3.34)
3
I could have skipped some of the far more speculative and fanciful aspects as well as the cringe-worthy pop culture references. (