The posts below were published on my old blog: blog.sina.com.cn/oknomad, which is banned. I’d like to post here.
An_experiment_to_testify_my_guess_of_interaction_with_possible_future
This post was published on 2021-10-11.
First, (caughing), I have a mistake to correct. As I said before, I watched a video introducing the delayed choice experiment which inspired me much, but I just found that the experiment is delayed choice quantum eraser experiment and not just delayed choice, and this video is created by an upper named “你可敢信” or “你可敢信K哥”, haha.
As I guessed before: a possbile future of this universe is capable of interacting with the present reality of this universe, and if in real future we don’t reach this possible future (which is not realized or certainized), then in our reality (of the present), there will be an unpaired cause/effect without its corresponding effect/cause in reality (of real future), because the possible future including the corresponding cause/effect is not realized/certainized or not reached by us.
Now, I figure out an experiment to testify my above guess of interaction with possible future, which I’d like to name as interrupted delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.
In this interrupted experiment, just after the D0 detector gets the result (particle or wave) and before the entangled photons reach the PS optical prism, you remove this PS optical prism. Or further more, you can remove the prism only when the D0 result is particle? It’s definitely applicable, for example: you can increase the length between the BBO and PS much longer to make the remove much easier.
In the original delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, the D0 effect happens before the cause of half mirror lens BSa and BSb, right? So, if this result is truely caused by this cause and this cause is a possible future, then the distribution of the D0 results in multiple times of this interrupted delayed choice quantum eraser experiment should be as same as the original delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, right? In original delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, the results of multiple times of the experiment should be close to a fixed distribution, like 75% of particle result and 25% of wave result on the D0 detector, and then in this interrupted experiment it should be the same, am I right? (PS: the 75% and 25% are wrong, and I’ve corrected it in later articles here, and it should 50% for either)
If I’m wrong about the exact percentage, it doesn’t matter if the principal is right, haha. If distribution of D0 results of this interrupted experiment is as same as the original delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, that means: even if the cause in a possible future will not exist in real future or the possible future including the cause will not be real (reached/realized/certainized), this cause from a possible future still incurs its effect in reality, and this real future or universe is losing logics in reality if without considering the possible future which is not real.
Am I right? Does this experiment deserve a try? Can it prove my guess about the interaction with possible future? haha.
Below is the illustration graph for delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.
PS: here is the link to the video introducing the original delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment from the video upper “你可敢信”, as your reference, haha ——https://www.ixigua.com/6949692444636086788?logTag=388bc79412f9a2586df8
suggesting_a_method_for_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2021-10-19.
I’d like to suggest a method for implementing the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment I mentioned.
I’ve suggested to increase the distance between BBO and PS(prism) to make the removing of PS more easily. Acctually, to be more accurate, this could also be to increase the distance between PS and BSa&BSb to make the removing of BSa&BSb more easily, because the cause in possible future is the reflections and transmissions of BSa&BSb (which decide the ratio between the wave interference results and the particle results without interefernce on D0 detector).
I just got an idea about how to increase the distance between BBO and PS or between PS and BSa&BSb. You can place many total mirrors between BBO and PS or between PS and BSa/BSb to make the light route turn around many times before the light reach PS or BSa/BSb. This means the space distance between D0 and PS or between D0 and BSa/BSb could be much shorter than the light route distance for photons to reach PS or BSa/BSb after D0 gets the result, so you can have enough time to remove PS or BSa/BSb just after D0 gets the result and before the photons reach the PS or BSa/BSb.
The illustration drawing for the delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment is as below.
(drawing is same as first post.)
haha_I_did_calculate_probability_wrong_for_daleyed_choiced_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2021-10-25.
Haha, as I expected, I did give the wrong probability in previous post for the delayed choiced quantumn eraser experiment and the interrupted experiment I suggested, because I got a little misunderstanding for the delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment. But this doesn’t affect my guess about interacting with possible future and the interrupted experiment I suggested.
In the delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment, the probability of either particle result or wave result of D0 detector should be 50%, because each time one photon is passing BBO from either the upper slit or lower slit, so the distribution of D0 results of many times of the experiment should be 50% for each result (particle or wave) which is decided by the half mirror lens BSa/BSb. So, in the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment I suggested, the distribution of the D0 results should be 50% for either as well, if my guess about the interacting with possible future is right.
Haha, it’s fun, isn’t it?
(drawing is same as first post.)
a_doubt_about_the_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2021-10-25.
I believe my guess of interacting with possible future has a good chance to be right, because in fact I got it from the stories of prophets first. Many great prophets like Jeane Dixon changed future according to what they foresaw and made wrong prophecies, which means possible future has interacted with them by let them see possible future and the possible future that they saw didn’t become true reality.
But I have a little doubt about the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment I suggested, because we don’t know how this universe is prebuilding its possible future. The time between D0 result and photon reaching PS or BSa/BSb is so short that you can’t interrupt the light route by hand, so if you program an automatic process to complete it, will this universe not prebuild the possible light route that will be interrupted at all? And you can only get wave result on the D0 just like there is no lower ligh route ( the light route from PS) at all?
There may be one solution, but I don’t know if it’s applicable. That solution is that you program a automatic process to remove the PS or BSa/BSb only when the D0 result is particle. But can you identify the D0 result only by one photon? And finally there is still the same question – will this universe consider this automatic process as well to eliminate the possible future containing the particle result on D0?
Maybe only our consiousness cannot be counted completely in the future prebuilding of this universe?
Anyway, I bet and promise you that, this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment will be very inspiring and extremely meaningful, and even if it cannot prove my guess about the interacting with possible future, it will provide you guys very valuable clues about how this universe is working especially its time, haha.
a_correction_for_my_interrputed_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2021-12-19.
It seems that I have a mistake about the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment I suggeseted before, although I think that this interrupted experiment can still be good and right for proving the possible future. So I’d like to give a correction or supplement for it.
There are total 3 typical scenes related to delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
First case: the typical delayed choice quantumn eraser experimemnt which is as the graph below, in which the existence of the half mirror lens BSc which erases the path of the marker quantumn, so there will be interference on the D0.
Second case: if we remove the entire lower part from the prism PS, because we cannot get the path information of the signal and marker photons either, then there will be interference on the D0 as well.
Third case: if we remove only the BSc from the graph below, we will be able to know the signal photon pass which slit and then our observation or reaching will collapse the signal photons to particles, so there will be NO interference on D0.
In the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment I suggested, before the emitting of each photon and until the signal photon reach the D0, the sytem should be exactly as the graph below which is the first case above, so there should be interference on D0;
and then if you remove the PS after the signal photon reaches the D0 and before the marker photon reaches the PS, the system will be the second case above, and there should be the interference on D0 as well, so I made a mistake here! You cannot remove the PS to do this interrupted experiment!
and then, if you remove only the BSc after the signal photon reaches the D0 and before the marker photon reaches the BSc, then the system will be the third case above, and there should be no interference on D0, so if there is still interference on D0, then this proves the interaction with possible future!
There are other ways to do this interrupted delayed choice quantumn erase experiment. Removing only the BSc is to tranform the first case to the third case above, and of course, you can transform between the first/second case and the third case after the signal photon reaches the D0 to do this interrupted experiment, and they all share the same nature.
At last, thanks for this video on internet which help me clarify the details of the delayed choice
quantumn eraser experiment. Below is the link of the video, thanks.
现在是可以改变过去的，延迟选择量子擦除实验，改变过去的8纳秒
Anyway, no matter what the result of this interrupted experiment is, I still believe my guess about the interaction with possible future could be right, because I believe many of the rumors and legends of those prophets, near death experiencers and special ability persons are true, for example: there is a famous Japanese astronomer who found several comets went back to past to save himself by his consiousness once in his near death experience. And also I don’t think past can be changed, because any change of past will just be like a butterfly effect in time flow which will change the present of this whole universe dramatically and will make our present complelety uncertain, which is not what our own consiousnesses experienced obviously. So even if this interrupted experiment fails, it may be just because of that this future change has been counted in the prebuilding of the future of this universe. Haha, this universe of computer is unimaginablly powerful as for present human ability, and maybe, we just cannot find its bug so easily, haha.
(drawing is same as first post.)
an_improved_version_of_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2021-12-20.
In my last article, I just correct a mistake in my original interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment. And also, I just think about an improved version of this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
I’ve talked before about that you can change the lower part (the part from PS prism) of the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment (as the graph below) according to the result of the D0 detector (interference or not). But recently some physics guys online talked about that one photon cannot produce interference. So just now I got an idea to improve my interrupted experiment.
The improved version is: supposing you have a 10 milliseconds delay after a signal photon reaches D0 and before the marker photon of this signal photon reaches PS/BSc, and supposing you need at least 1000 photons to create an interference, then you can emit 1000 photons one by one in 1ms from the light source to BBO, and you need to create an automated process which can determine whether the result of this 1000 photons on the D0 is interference or not in some span like 5ms, and then you can change the lower part of the graph below (the part from PS prism) acording to the result of D0 – if the result of D0 is interference, you make the lower part of the graph below to be the third case as I mentioned in my last article, and if the result of D0 is not interference, you make the lower part of the graph below to be the first/second case as I mentioned in my last article, and this will definitely prove my guess of interaction with possible future, right?
I guess some guys may have thought about this plan after they read my original version of this interrupted experiment, haha, but the really extremely difficult and challenging part is to implement it, right? I’m quite sure anyone who can complete this definitly deserve some 1M dollar prize of physics, yes, the money is not so much that you (or I) cannot make real fortune by this prize, and this may be why earth science improve so slowly, haha.
The first, second and third case I mentioned above and in my last article are explained below.
There are total 3 typical scenes related to delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
First case: the typical delayed choice quantumn eraser experimemnt which is as the graph below, in which the existence of the half mirror lens BSc which erases the path of the marker quantumn, so there will be interference on the D0.
Second case: if we remove the entire lower part from the prism PS, because we cannot get the path information of the signal and marker photons either, then there will be interference on the D0 as well.
Third case: if we remove only the BSc from the graph below, we will be able to know the signal photon pass which slit and then our observation or reaching will collapse the signal photons to particles, so there will be NO interference on D0.
(drawing is same as first post.)
summary_for_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
This post was published on 2022-03-17.
Somebody suggested me to submit my article to some magazine, and this reminded me that none of my previous articles is complete about this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment yet. So I make a summary for it here, to prepare a submition, haha.
I’d like to introduce an interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment which is based on the delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment, and talk a little about its meanings if it succeeds.
1) Something about the interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment
summary_for_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
The graph above is a typical illustration graph of a delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment, and the lower part of this graph includes all parts which are from PS and including PS. There are total 3 typical cases related to delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
First case is exactly as the above graph which is the typical delayed choice quantumn eraser experimemnt, in which the existence of the half mirror lens BSc which erases the path of the marker quantumn, so there will be interference on the D0.
Second case is: we remove the entire lower part from the prism PS, because we cannot get the path information of the signal and marker photons either, then there will be interference on the D0 as well.
Third case is: we remove only the BSc from the graph below, we will be able to know the signal photon pass which slit and then our observation or reaching will collapse the signal photons to particles, so there will be NO interference on D0.
2) The interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment which is based on the delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
There are two versions of this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment: a basic version and an improved version.
For both versions, supposing you have a 10 milliseconds delay after a signal photon reaches D0 and before the marker photon of this signal photon reaches PS/BSc, and supposing you need at least 1000 photons to create an interference, then you can emit 1000 photons one by one in 1ms from the light source to BBO, and then you can do one of two sets steps below to complete this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment.
For the basic version, after all the 1000 photons have reached D0, you just need to change the lower part of the above graph either from the first/second case to the third case or from the third case to the first/second case. And thus if this experiment succeeds, the D0 result will not be consistant to the lower part of the below graph.
For the improved version, you need to create an automated process which can determine whether the result of this 1000 photons on the D0 is interference or not in some span like 5ms, and then you can change the lower part of the above graph acording to the result of D0 – if the result of D0 is interference, you change the lower part of the above graph to the third case from the first/second case, and if the result of D0 is not interference, you change the lower part of the above graph to the first/second case from the third case. And thus if this experiment succeeds, the D0 result will not be consistant to the lower part of the above graph.
3) If this interrupted delayed choice quantumn eraser experiment succeed, what could it mean?
If this experiment succeeds which means the result of D0 finally turns out to be not consistant with the lower part of the above graph, I have some guesses below.
First, this universe is prebuilding its possible future, so the time structure of this universe is as graph below.
Second, there are some rules for the possible future of this universe as below.
In reality and all possible futures of the past & present of this universe, the effects of any interaction should be consistent to the certain fixed laws/rules/principals of this universe.
In this universe, the present reality is capable to interacting with a possible future, and this interacting possible future may not be realized or reached or reality in future, and thus the reality of this universe may lose logistics – losing this interaction’s effects in this unrealized possible future out of reality and only have other effects of this interaction in the (present or future) reality of this universe.
In this universe, the past we reached has been certainized which is not able to or not allowed to change, and so any interaction with the certainized past by the present and all possible futures should be consistent to the certain fixed laws/rules/principals of this universe.
Below is the illustration drawing of the time structure or time field of this universe.
summary_for_interrupted_delayed_choice_quantumn_eraser_experiment
Be First to Comment