Question

[dusty]

I have a question for anyone with some understanding of quantum physics. Please bare in mind I only have a leymans level of understanding but I find this topic fascinating.

My question is, When the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is up and running and say they are successful in creating microscopic black holes, if they then were able to generate a stream of paired particles and fire one of each pair into the black hole, taking into account the whole thing about quantum entanglement and the fact that what happens to one will register some observable reaction in the other, what do you clever people think might be seen in the survivor?

I realise that if tiny black holes were created their existence would be fleeting to say the least and therefore the possibility of sending a stream of particles at one might be impossible for all I know, and that anything that gets consumed has no way of escape just like light or information.
But this quantum entanglement thing got me wondering if it might be a way of discerning if you'll pardon the pun, in our universe what goes on behind the event horizon.

Peace,

Mark

 

[TClaeys]

I sure as hell couldn't tell you, but that is a great question. I'd be interested in hearing an answer.

In the meantime I just started reading a fictional book called Blasphemy by Douglas Preston. It is about a particle collider built in the US on the range of the LHC. I don't know how it will turn out, but his books are pretty easy reads and thought you might be interested. It is fiction of course, but you know, might be interesting.

 

[Xylo]

I can't answer that question either, and boy it is a good one.

From what I understand though, these "micro-blackholes" are only in existence for a microsecond or so. There would have to be some extremely good planning in order to fire one of a pair of twin particles into it in such a short time span. It's possible. Not sure what the outcome would be.

 

[dusty]

Thanks TC I will look out for that,

I do like this sort of book and should really read more, mostly a case of not making the time. I tend to go through phases of reading lots and then nothing at all. I think the last Sci-fi novel I read was "Attack of the Rockoids" believe it or not, and I thoroughly enjoyed it I must say.

I find Sci-fi inspires many interesting ideas in me most of which are quite ridiculous I would guess at least from the point of view of an expert, but it's important to stretch our minds and try to gain some understanding from such questions. In fact this particular question came about from my listening to this FREE audiobook which I'm sure your all sick of me banging on about so here's a link,
http://www.podiobooks.com/podiobooks/book.php?ID=61

If it's easier you can download this through i-tunes. If you want to hear about the science behind the novel go here, again available via i-tunes,
http://www.podiobooks.com/title/doctor-jacks-soapbox-seminars

In fact I am so impressed by this author that I would even like to suggest Gene and Dave try and get him on the show sometime as he is so well informed about the Tunguska event in particular, (if you read the next link I think you'll get the picture) which still to this day hasn't really been explained, and his take on the Jackson/ Ryan hypothesis basically demands this idea be given another serious look.
http://riverofstars.net/JSCAS/Starscan/Oct04.pdf

Mark

 

[Poi]

Great question, Dusty. Wonder what Michio Kaku might say on the matter. I choose him because he's the most visible and accessible physicist around.

Surely there are others who might venture to answer your question. Can anyone think of someone else, someone who might attempt to answer it?

 

[PointLess]

I have a question for anyone with some understanding of quantum physics. Please bare in mind I only have a leymans level of understanding but I find this topic fascinating.

My question is, When the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is up and running and say they are successful in creating microscopic black holes, if they then were able to generate a stream of paired particles and fire one of each pair into the black hole, taking into account the whole thing about quantum entanglement and the fact that what happens to one will register some observable reaction in the other, what do you clever people think might be seen in the survivor?

I realise that if tiny black holes were created their existence would be fleeting to say the least and therefore the possibility of sending a stream of particles at one might be impossible for all I know, and that anything that gets consumed has no way of escape just like light or information.
But this quantum entanglement thing got me wondering if it might be a way of discerning if you'll pardon the pun, in our universe what goes on behind the event horizon.

Peace,

Mark

Hy Mark,

really good question.
Because entanglement (say of 2 particles) is a kind of 'new state' you cannot say in what state one of the participating particle actually is (it is in a superimposition situation of all possibilities). If you measure (with a detector) one of the particles (like in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment) you get a specific answer (say spin-up if you're measuring spins), but which is completly randomly chosen (of course some qm-states may have a higher probablity to be measured). So if one of the particles get caught by a black hole I think you are going to measure nothing special, you just will see the most probable state of this remnant. I hope I understood you correctly...:shy:

Btw: LHC is NOT going to produce black holes (I will hold any bet), and much better even if they do those black holes arent of any importance just because our earth atmosphere is bombarded in any single second with particles (most likely protons) with much higher energies (up to 10^20-10^21 eV whereas LHC has an energy of 'only' ~10^12 eV)...and yet we still are here.

 

[dusty]

Thanks PointLess,

As I said I dont have very much understanding of this subject but I do get the bit about the spin up or down states of each particle due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle I guess, and that this cannot be known definitively until a measurement is taken.

Beyond that is purely my wild imagination for you I'm sorry to say, and yes you did understand my question correctly. I suspect you are right as well about the likelyhood of there being very little chance of getting any more information. Having said that I took Poi's advice, Thanks Poi, and wrote to Michio Kaku to ask him the same question and if I get a response I will post it.

I also took the opportunity to ask him to listen to this show and to consider coming on here to explain some of this stuff. So fingers crossed but I wont hold my breath.

Mark

 

[skunkape]

But this quantum entanglement thing got me wondering if it might be a way of discerning if you'll pardon the pun, in our universe what goes on behind the event horizon.

You don't really think the "Censors" would ever let that one on the air, do you?
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[campfiregirl]

Thanks PointLess,

Having said that I took Poi's advice, Thanks Poi, and wrote to Michio Kaku to ask him the same question and if I get a response I will post it.

I also took the opportunity to ask him to listen to this show and to consider coming on here to explain some of this stuff. So fingers crossed but I wont hold my breath.

Mark

That would be a fantastic episode - thanks for making that contact. If not him, I wonder if David & Gene know anyone else? I've been hoping for this kind of show forevah...

 

[AnnetteMarie]

I sure as hell couldn't tell you, but that is a great question. I'd be interested in hearing an answer.

In the meantime I just started reading a fictional book called Blasphemy by Douglas Preston. It is about a particle collider built in the US on the range of the LHC. I don't know how it will turn out, but his books are pretty easy reads and thought you might be interested. It is fiction of course, but you know, might be interesting.

ahhh, synchronicity - bought that book a short while ago and read it, easy read, didn't see the end coming. 'nuff said.

 

[Drew UK]

As always, I am not the ideal student for Quantum stuff - I try to keep a cautious approach on some of the quantum fizz ideas.
Could this question be answered more cheaply?

The Uncertainty Principle Is Untenable

 

[dusty]

Cheaply, I like it Drew,

Sorry kinda lost me with all the equations and expressions there, but you have inspired yet more questions.

Like if say from a photons pov time doesn't exist. If it is then lost to this universe behind the event horizon, how could it have ever existed in the first place? If again from it's pov it's final destination must already be predetermined but at a point that cares nothing for either space or time itself?

Man it's at times like this that I regret not having had a better education.

Mark

 

[Xylo]

Surely there are others who might venture to answer your question. Can anyone think of someone else, someone who might attempt to answer it?

My top pick would have been Richard Feynman. Second pick would be Leon Lederman, author of "The God Particle."

 

[dusty]

Hi gang,

Been a while since I last posted (personal nightmare don't ask). And yeah I know it's an old thread but for the benefit of all you new listeners and forum members I think it's well worth a mention.
Anyway thanks to the wonders of the internet and more specifically "facebook" I have been fortunate enough to connect with author, Bill De Smedt, of Singularity fame,
http://www.billdesmedt.com/

The reason I mention this, is because it was only after listening to "Singularity" via i-tunes did the initial question arise for me. Basically I fired the question at Bill and he was kind enough to respond with this,

Hi, Mark --

That's an interesting question. Your thought experiment doesn't really require the LHC or its (still hypothetical) micro-holes, though, so let's dispense with that part of it, and simply consider what happens to the "free" half of an entangled particle pair once the other half has fallen into a black hole of arbitrary size.

In all of the entangled-pair/quantum teleportation scenarios I'm familiar with, it is true that you can reconstitute the state of one member of the pair by manipulating the other. So on the surface it might sound like you could determine what was happening to a particle that fell into the hole by observing its opposite number on the outside.

But here's the rub: the reconstitution in question requires first sending a sub-lightspeed message from the particle in the hole to the one outside. (This is a special case of the more general gotcha that prevents the use of entangled pairs for FTL communication, etc.) That being the case, there's no way to get the subluminal reconstitutive "guide" message out from behind the event horizon in the first place.

So, no go -- thanks for playing!

(In point of fact, all the virtual particle pairs whose creation underlies Hawking radiation (in one interpretation) are entangled from the get-go, so if the mechanism you posit actually worked, we'd be able to observe the state of particles inside the black horizon from anywhere in the immediate vicinity of a hole, just by analyzing the radiation itself.)

Thanks for the intriguing puzzle, and for setting up the Singularity forum. It's for fans like you that I write this stuff!

Best,
Bill

What a guy huh? Took the time out of his day to respond to little old me, Huge respect to him. Anyway enough gushing but please do yourselves a favour and listen to or buy this book. Older members will probably be fed up with me for mentioning it again but seriously you have to give it a listen, and here's another heads up for you.
Bill's new book is "Dualism" is nearing publication.

Peace,

Mark