[HN Gopher] Quantum Mischief Rewrites the Laws of Cause and Effect
___________________________________________________________________
Quantum Mischief Rewrites the Laws of Cause and Effect
Author : rbanffy
Score : 39 points
Date : 2021-03-13 19:20 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.quantamagazine.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.quantamagazine.org)
| yarg wrote:
| I've thought about similar things, it seems to me to be a sort of
| retroactive causality.
|
| It seems to me that there will be mutually exclusive states of
| reality existing in different spatial contexts; it's only at the
| meeting of light cones that the contradiction is reconciled (the
| likelihood of superposition mutex events is zero).
| antiquark wrote:
| How is this not a perpetual motion machine:
|
| > engines normally need a hot and cold reservoir to work, with a
| quantum switch they could extract heat from reservoirs of equal
| temperature -- a surprising use suggested a year ago by Oxford
| theorists.
| lumost wrote:
| This is something akin to maxwell's demon. All Quantum
| processes save for measurement are reversible, and as such many
| thermodynamics concepts don't apply or don't apply in all
| circumstances.
| darig wrote:
| Dibs on Quantum Mischief band name
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| This is an interesting, but obvious-in-retrospect, consequence of
| superposition. Amplitude is contributed by all paths, but it's
| contributed _to a state_ (a way-that-the-universe-could-be). The
| history is irrelevant, unless it has an effect on the final state
| - which is always true in the macroscopic world, thanks to the
| second law of thermodynamics and historians and space probes and
| chaos theory, but not always true in the microscopic world, where
| things are simpler.
|
| This means that multiple histories contribute to a final state-
| of-the-universe: If A-B-C and A-D-C are indistinguishable
| (because C is the same state as C) then they _both_ contribute
| amplitude - in layperson 's terms, both histories are happening
| in parallel, then combining when they get to the same state.
|
| If you've got states X and Y, and you're doing something like XOR
| swap, then you can go (X, Y) - (X^Y, Y) - (X^Y, X) - (Y, X) _or_
| (X, Y) - (X, X^Y) - (Y, X^Y) - (Y, X). This isn 't fundamentally
| different from the ABC / ADC case; it _obviously_ follows that
| this would happen too, though I 'd never though it of it before.
|
| Very thought-provoking article.
| optimalsolver wrote:
| See also retrocausality, aka backwards causation:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality
|
| https://aeon.co/essays/can-retrocausality-solve-the-puzzle-o...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-13 23:00 UTC)