Quote:
|
Now, through this calculation, you have acquired both the momentum and the position of the subatomic particles, which contradicts the Uncertainty Principle.
|
Actually that's not how entanglement works. Even with entangled states you cannot measure or deduce the position/momentum pair of one of the states.
Say you measure momentum of one of the two entangled states. That collapses not just the wave function of one state, but both! That is the very definition of entanglement. You do learn about the other state, but the measurement has actually destroyed the information about position. So even if you now measure the position of the second state, given that the wave function has already collapsed, measurement of the position does not allow you to infer back onto the first state's position. So even though you got a position and a momentum measurement you only get one pair of measurements. For the whole system you'd need 2 full pairs! So the uncertainty principle is not violated at all. As a side, entangled systems actually carry less information than the 2 states that you can measure, because if you measure correlated information you end up learning less than 1 measurement of information, because some information is shared. That is precisely what is exploited in some of the cooler applications of entanglement (quantum teleportation etc).
The "canonical" proposal of quantum consciousness are somewhat different (the collapse of the wave function itself is supposedly the "moment of consciousness" if we believe Penrose), and it's highly speculative, in fact there is absolutely no evidence that it is true. I would actually go so far as to say that it is very likely not how it works, and numerous papers have been written of this. E.g. in persistent entanglement in warm biological systems seems fantastically unlikely and flies in the face of what we observe when studying decoherence in complex "warm" systems.
06-17-2011, 11:40 PM
Linear Mode
