2
$\begingroup$

Some days ago I asked this question involving quantum teleportation. It have been closed by moderator for assuming new physics. However in fact it is a misunderstanding and I think I have clarified this. So could it be reopened now?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I don't see that you've clarified anything; you never edited the question after its original posting. Without editing, whatever problems there were with the original question still remain.

Beyond that, the way you've framed the question puts it outside the scope of mainstream physics. In particular, when you talk about mental states being entangled, and in general the idea of the mind being represented by a quantum state, that is something that (I think) we don't deal with on this site. I can't make any guarantees, but if you reframe the question in terms of entangled single-particle states, or in terms of entangled states with known behavior, it would probably look a lot better.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Wait, why mind get entangled is not dealt in this site? The quantum state is not only for particles, but also any system. In particular, states of human beings' minds, which can be reduced to the status of the neural network, I think. $\endgroup$ – Popopo Jan 30 '13 at 16:18
  • $\begingroup$ OK, true, it doesn't have to be single-particle states. But there is not an established framework for treating the mind as a quantum system. You'll have to reframe the question in terms of something with a quantum state with known properties. $\endgroup$ – David Z Jan 30 '13 at 16:24
  • $\begingroup$ Well, in the thought experiment named Schrödinger's cat, he merely considered 'cat state' one property: survivability. Is it one of known properties? $\endgroup$ – Popopo Jan 30 '13 at 16:33
  • $\begingroup$ In that thought experiment, the state of the cat is reduced to a superposition of "dead" and "alive," equivalent to a single-particle state. It's well known what constitutes a dead cat vs. a living cat and how to tell the difference with observation. Talking about quantum states of the mind has philosophical subtleties that don't exist with the cat. $\endgroup$ – David Z Jan 30 '13 at 16:40
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, I edited my post and made Alice and Bob robots. $\endgroup$ – Popopo Jan 30 '13 at 16:52
  • $\begingroup$ @Popopo You seem (to me) start that post by talking about why a machine system based on entanglement can not be used for superluminal communications (a correct assertion), and then you seem to assert that they can use an entangled system for communications (initially in the context of minds). Have I misunderstood your intent in writing the beginning parts of that post? Is the question why can't entanglement be used for superluminal communication in general? $\endgroup$ – dmckee Jan 30 '13 at 17:13
  • $\begingroup$ @dmckee Yes, you are right. But it seems can indeed according to my thought experiment, so what's wrong? $\endgroup$ – Popopo Jan 31 '13 at 4:03
  • $\begingroup$ No, it can't. You thought experiment is exactly the same as everyone else has when they hear of this and the result is the same. Neither Alice nor Bob can impose any information content on the channel. Alice, standing by while Bob's sister Carol is in labor can not let the absent Bob know if the baby is named Dan or Daniela no matter how many entangled pairs they share. $\endgroup$ – dmckee Jan 31 '13 at 4:15
  • $\begingroup$ @dmckee Okay, could you please give me a proof? Or share some references to me? $\endgroup$ – Popopo Jan 31 '13 at 7:54
  • $\begingroup$ @dmckee: Technically, you can tell the difference between an entangled state and a collapsed state via a double slit setup or something similar. $\endgroup$ – Manishearth Jan 31 '13 at 9:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .