Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Quantum entanglement has now been directly observed at a larger macroscopic scale

#1
C C Offline
https://www.sciencealert.com/quantum-ent...opic-scale

EXCERPT: . . . "If you analyze the position and momentum data for the two drums independently, they each simply look hot," says physicist John Teufel, from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the US. "But looking at them together, we can see that what looks like random motion of one drum is highly correlated with the other, in a way that is only possible through quantum entanglement."

While there's nothing to say that quantum entanglement can't happen with macroscopic objects, before now it was thought that the effects weren't noticeable at larger scales – or perhaps that the macroscopic scale was governed by another set of rules.

This new research suggests that's not the case. In fact, the same quantum rules apply here, too, and can actually be seen as well. Researchers vibrated the tiny drum membranes using microwave photons and kept them kept in a synchronized state in terms of their position and velocities.

To prevent outside interference, a common problem with quantum states, the drums were cooled, entangled, and measured in separate stages while inside a cryogenically chilled enclosure. The states of the drums are then encoded in a reflected microwave field that works in a similar way to radar.

Previous studies have also reported on macroscopic quantum entanglement, but the new research goes further: All of the necessary measurements were recorded rather than inferred, and the entanglement was generated in a deterministic, non-random way... (MORE - details)
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
"one-fifth the width of a human hair" is hardly what most people would consider macroscopic, seeing as you'd need a microscope to see them.
Reply
#3
stryder Offline
(May 9, 2021 12:11 AM)Syne Wrote: "one-fifth the width of a human hair" is hardly what most people would consider macroscopic, seeing as you'd need a microscope to see them.
I don't think it was the "size" that was important to researchers but the collation of the reaction. It's still termed a macroscopic reaction when it's involving more than one event to generate the composite result.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article Quantum entanglement visualized for the first time ever C C 1 86 Sep 3, 2023 10:02 PM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  Quantum entanglement directly observed at macroscopic scale + Maxwell’s demon reboot C C 4 306 Oct 23, 2022 12:53 AM
Last Post: confused2
  Debunked: delayed choice quantum eraser + What to know about quantum mechanics C C 5 212 Nov 4, 2021 01:17 AM
Last Post: confused2
  Phy: Cosmos has been expanding eternally + Throwing an ‘axion bomb’ into a black hole C C 0 90 Jun 25, 2021 11:18 PM
Last Post: C C
  "Human-scale" object reaches a quantum state + Quantum tunneling of particles is FTL C C 0 142 Jun 17, 2021 11:42 PM
Last Post: C C
  Crisis of quantum gravity + Has the black hole information paradox evaporated? C C 0 133 Mar 24, 2021 05:32 PM
Last Post: C C
  Anyons confirmed, quantum computing role + Quantum teleportation achieved C C 3 289 Dec 21, 2020 09:05 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Lab stand-in for wormholes + Impossible BHs explained at tiniest scale? + Sings real? C C 0 124 Dec 18, 2020 11:26 PM
Last Post: C C
  The Standard Model is not enough or "Should CERN build a larger collider or not?" C C 1 192 Oct 24, 2020 12:50 AM
Last Post: C C
  GR rebukes again + Quest for what bars Q superpositions from large scale objects C C 2 180 Oct 16, 2020 10:05 PM
Last Post: confused2



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)