Quantum Entangled Particles Break Classical Law of Thermodynamics

[RandallS]

It's apparently possible to extract more energy from entangled particles than classical thermodynamics allows. You may remember that Japanese physicists came up with a way to actually do the "Maxwell's demon" thought experiment in the lab. It doesn't break the second law of thermodynamics once you account for all the energy used to control the atoms. However, if you have atoms in two containers and the atoms are quantum entangled, you apparent can violate the second law because you only have to measure the info about the atoms in one box to know the info about the atoms in the other. Since Maxwell's demon is basically a method of converting information into energy, this "free info" about half the atoms allows more energy to be created than the classical second law of thermodynamics allows. This is another example of how "common sense" from the macro-world just doesn't always apply to quantum world.

More info: Read the article

[WarHorse]

Read the article

 
I read the article - I think I absorbed some of it.  More entertaining is the discussion after it, where the premise of the article is debunked.

[RandallS]

I read the article - I think I absorbed some of it.  More entertaining is the discussion after it, where the premise of the article is debunked.

LOL. As far as I can tell, the commenting debunkers have a poor understanding of classical physics, let alone quantum mechanics. Understanding on the order of the creationists who claim that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics.

[WarHorse]

LOL. As far as I can tell, the commenting debunkers have a poor understanding of classical physics, let alone quantum mechanics. Understanding on the order of the creationists who claim that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics.

If you find an article that explains it better, let me know.  The debunkers seemed to make sense.

[Annie Roonie]

This is another example of how "common sense" from the macro-world just doesn't always apply to quantum world.

More info: Read the article

Ah! When I hit observation I started thinking about that word superposition. And the wiki explains why. Whew.

I imagine it like a child separated from its spirit in a room. Whichever is more active, goes through a gate to the stairwell and isn't allowed back for a time.  New information is shared with whatever one stays put because they are the same kiddo. You get double info though because they are acting separately. The energy needed to see the spirit, open the gate, and get the info. is the thing the debunkers are claiming makes things equal out.

How wonky is that for trying to understand? Ha!

[RandallS]

If you find an article that explains it better, let me know.  The debunkers seemed to make sense.

The debunkers seem to be confusing the two experiments. The initial one without two sets of atoms quantum entanged doesn't violate the second law for the reason(s) they cite, measuring the atoms to handle the stair step effect to get the Maxwell's demon effect takes energy.  However, with two sets of atoms that are quantumly entangled, you only need to measure atoms in one "box" as quantum entanglement ensures the atoms in the other box are the same. One measurement, but two atoms undergoing the Maxwell's demon effect. On paper it apparently works (and would violate the second law). Now they have to actually do it to show the math matches reality and others will try hard to show that the extra energy comes from somewhere else.

[SunflowerP]

If you find an article that explains it better, let me know.  The debunkers seemed to make sense.

 
Torbjorn Larsson was making a fair bit of sense (he usually does - I'm familiar with his comments from Universe Today), but I'm not sure I'd count what he was doing as debunking, exactly; more like taking issue with sensationalism in how this is presented.

Those taking issue with the science, rather than with how the article presented the science, not so much.

Sunflower

[RandallS]

Torbjorn Larsson was making a fair bit of sense (he usually does - I'm familiar with his comments from Universe Today), but I'm not sure I'd count what he was doing as debunking, exactly; more like taking issue with sensationalism in how this is presented.

And I agree, too much sensationalism. As far as I can tell, this hasn't actually been done. All that appears to have been done is the math which shows there is an actual experiment really worth doing.  Also, even if you can use quantum effects to break the second law of thermodynamics, it is not quite the huge physics breaking deal the article implies. Quantum effects often break classical physical laws. Quantum entanglement can by allowing instant interaction at huge distances -- they mention this in the article (the bit about measuring one entangled particle giving you information about the other even if the other is across the universe) but did not make anything out the problems that gives classical physics).
 
Yes, if this proves to be correct it might have practical effects in the macro world someday. Lots of quantum mechanical weirdness can/does. The semiconductors used in all the electronics we use everyday would not work without the quantum mechanical strangeness called quantum tunneling. We depend on this breaking of classical physical law every day.

[WarHorse]

Those taking issue with the science, rather than with how the article presented the science, not so much.

Sunflower

 

All that appears to have been done is the math which shows there is an actual experiment really worth doing.


 
The semiconductors used in all the electronics we use everyday would not work without the quantum mechanical strangeness called quantum tunneling. We depend on this breaking of classical physical law every day.

 
Okay, my scalp is tingling.  This usually means my conscious brain is saying "huh?" while my subconscious is saying "OH, COOL!"  It will pop up somewhere else, in my writing most likely.

Thanks you two.

[RandallS]

Thanks you two.

No problem. Quantum mechanics is weird with all sorts of counter-intuitive stuff. A lot of people really wish it would just go away -- but it will not in spite of about three-quarters of a century of various scientists trying.

[SunflowerP]

This is another example of how "common sense" from the macro-world just doesn't always apply to quantum world.

Only just noticed how well this sentence from your OP relates to the part I couldn't figure out yesterday how to express:
 
That's where the less-nonsensical attempts at debunking earned your comparison to creationists:  even classical physics (as it's currently understood) doesn't line up neatly with the everyday "common sense" they were trying to argue from.

Sunflower

[Dragonoake]

It's apparently possible to extract more energy from entangled particles than classical thermodynamics allows.

Not so sure ...
When you entangle two atoms, are you creating two distinct but identical atoms?
Or are you creating a strong probability that a single atom will be available at one of two particular places at a particular time for you to observe it?

[RandallS]

Not so sure ...
When you entangle two atoms, are you creating two distinct but identical atoms?
Or are you creating a strong probability that a single atom will be available at one of two particular places at a particular time for you to observe it?

The entangled atoms share the same quantum state and if you change the quantum state of one, the other instantaneously changes to match -- no matter how much distance now separates the atoms. Likewise, if you determine the quantum state of one entangled atoms, you know the state of the other as it must be the same Because of the quantum entanglement). This has all been demonstrated by experiment.
 
This is often referred to as "spooky interaction at a distance".

[Michael]

Quantum mechanics is weird with all sorts of counter-intuitive stuff.

 
Very well said;the possibilities and implications of quantum entanglement absolutely blow my mind. I just finished reading a book on quantum computing theory(I'm drawing a blank as to the name ATM however),and if I were not a logical,open-minded man I would have dismissed the whole thing as science-fiction.

I consider myself a fairly intelligent,well(albeit self)-educated, I think very three-dimensionally and see solutions not obvious to most. Still quantum entanglement and it's implications are largely beyond my ability to fully comprehend. Heck I'm still wrapping my head around some of the physics described in "The Holographic Universe" and I first read that some years ago. I can't wait to see the breakthroughs in technological comprehnsion and application that I'll see in my lifetime.
GO SCIENCE!....Sorry;major nerd here.
If anyone could recommend any books,research papers,etc. on anything related to quantum entanglement,especially quantum computing,please suggest them to me! I'm an obsessive learner and I seek to comprehend more about this seemingly impossible phenomenon.     Thanks again!      -Michael