Simulated optics experiment/Data analysis: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→{{header|Julia}}: fix comment to avoid quantum philosophical language) |
|||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Note that, statistically, the extra correlation in the analysis is inserted via the call to swap_LR_channels(), which |
Note that, statistically, the extra correlation in the analysis is inserted via the call to swap_LR_channels(), which |
||
is statistically dependent on whether the initial photon pair is [0, 90] or [90, 0]. |
is statistically dependent on whether the initial photon pair is [0, 90] or [90, 0]. |
||
We are not using quantum mechanics (which is supposed to be agnostic about mechanisms, anyway), and the light pulses are not presumed to be "photons". I purposely kept that word out, even though transmitting light bursts is what experiments do. The light bursts could be modeled as very short bursts of electromagnetic waves. The correlation coefficient can be regarded as that of the electromagnetic fields of the light pulses, computed according to classical optics. Nevertheless, given the experimental arrangement, we get the results predicted by quantum mechanics, ''which is widely supposed to be impossible to do with a classical model'' of experiments. It is something to think about. --[[User:Chemoelectric|Chemoelectric]] ([[User talk:Chemoelectric|talk]]) 12:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{trans|Python}} |
{{trans|Python}} |
||
<syntaxhighlight lang="julia">using Printf |
<syntaxhighlight lang="julia">using Printf |
||