Simulated optics experiment/Data analysis: Difference between revisions
Simulated optics experiment/Data analysis (view source)
Revision as of 15:46, 29 May 2023
, 1 year agoWrote the introduction. Not yet the task description, though.
(Added a bit more to the canonical example, ahead of writing the task text.) |
(Wrote the introduction. Not yet the task description, though.) |
||
Line 1:
{{draft task}}
{{task heading|Introduction}}
In this task, you will write a program to analyze the "raw data" outputted by one of the [[Simulated optics experiment/Simulator]] implementations. The analysis will estimate the following numbers:
* Four ''[[wp:Correlation_coefficient|correlation coefficients]]'': one for each of the four possible combinations of the two polarizing beam splitter angles. These measure the interrelatedness of light detection events on the two sides of the experiment.
* A ''[[wp:CHSH_inequality|CHSH contrast]]'', which is derived from the correlation coefficients.
Quantum mechanics predicts a CHSH contrast of approximately <math>2\sqrt{2}\approx{2.828427}</math>. The ''[[Simulated optics experiment/Simulator]]'' simulation will be shown (by our analysis) to have a CHSH contrast very close to that. Note that our simulation does not employ any quantum mechanics, but instead simulates light [[wp:Classical_physics|"classically"]]. Also our simulation clearly involves only causation that in each instance takes a finite amount of forward-moving time. That is, there is no "[[wp:Action_at_a_distance|instantaneous action at a distance]]".
The prevailing view in physics, however, is that a CHSH contrast greater than 2 (which we certainly achieve) is possible only with quantum mechanics, and also that taking measurements on one side of the apparatus "instantaneously" determines what the measurements will be on the other side. Although quantum mechanics actually has no concept of "causation", this "determination" is often described as being "instantaneous action at a distance".
Thus, we are left with a conundrum: we clearly get a CHSH contrast not only greater than 2, but in fact very close to the theoretical value that quantum mechanics predicts. This is, in fact, a validation of the quantum mechanical mathematics: the mathematics is producing the correct result for this kind of experiment. On the other hand, the ''strong'' prevailing view in physics is that ''this cannot be happening'' if the physics involved is "classical"--which our simulated physics very much is. The prevailing view is that experiments similar to ours ''prove'' that "instantaneous action at a distance" is a real thing that exists. One sometimes sees such "proof" touted in the popular media.
I leave it to each individual to think about that conundrum and come to their own opinions.
{{task heading|Task description}}
TO BE ADDED VERY SOON. This is temporary place-filler.
Line 230 ⟶ 245:
An example using data from the Python implementation of ''[[Simulated optics experiment/Simulator]]''.
<pre>
light pulse events 100000
| |||