Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Science
In reply to the discussion: Quantum Entanglement, Dark Counts, Coincidence Detection [View all]caraher
(6,278 posts)68. One more thought...
One advantage of the TAC/MCA/SCA approach is that, armed with photon arrival time data, you can essentially look at whether coincidence measurements matter after the fact. Looking at this paper, they generate their interference patterns (I think) by post-selecting data: "Because we record the time interval distribution of coincidence counts, we can analyze two-photon interference visibility with delayed choice of the coincidence time window." In their case, they want to compare fringe visibility for coincidence windows larger and smaller than the path length delay difference. In the case of Cramer-like experiments, you can either use a coincidence window or ignore it entirely.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
92 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
knowing they exist and know what everyone else calls them are two different things.
nebenaube
Jul 2013
#6
I don't see why what I need would be any bigger then say a .22 slug (for lack of a better reference)
nebenaube
Jul 2013
#37
Sorry for he late reply, bu yeah, I've been working with an optical breadboard
mindwalker_i
May 2014
#79
My intuition tells me the past and the future are rather symmetrical about any local present.
hunter
May 2014
#75