Live data from Hacker News

Quantum Game with Photons

play.quantumgame.io

41–50 of 53 posts

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This game isn't writing the numbers (complex-valued probability amplitudes of states, classical EM vectors even) anywhere so it's going to be pretty hard to relate what you're seeing here to the math that you'll find if you look up interference elsewhere. I'll make an attempt here, though. I think the effect on level 4 is totally classical so it shouldn't take too much background. 1. The solution to a problem involvi…

Thanks for the great explanation! If you don't mind, I had a question about '3.' I get how it's used in making your larger argument, but as a thing in itself I'm kinda lost. Part of what I'm wondering is how it's okay to say 'L(W) = 0' when earlier you described L(W) like 'L(W: wavefunction) => X: wavefunction'; so is the zero in 'L(W) = 0' just shorthand for something like 'L(W) = (f(x,t) = 0)'? (I'm also curious wh…

>it looks like it's equating the function returned by L(W) with zero

There is a deeper point to be made here that I'm glad you brought up. Functions form a vector space (because they satisfy the axioms of vector behavior, basically because they can be added to each other and scaled by constant multiples). In linear algebra the symbol 0 often does double-duty as the zero vector, which is defined as the vector that doesn't change other vectors when it's added to them. So, here, when I write L(W) = 0 I'm implicitly invoking 0 = f_zero(x,t) = 0.

As for why "mapping to zero" has a physical basis, well, it's really more of a thing we're always guaranteed to be able to do. You can always subtract everything from the right-hand side of an equation! For example, Wikipedia introduces the one-dimensional wave equation as D_t^2 u = a^2 D_x^2 u. I can also write that as L[u] = D_t^2 u - q^2 * D_x^2 u = 0, so L[u] = 0. (In my notation, D_x is the derivative with respect to x, and D_x^2 is the second derivative with respect to x.)

The real question is why the addition thing works; if I had to try explaining it I would just say it's just fundamental that Maxwell's equations are linear, and when dealing with things that aren't, we usually approximate them with linear functions anyways[0]. That's how gravitational waves emerge from GR, by the way: at low energies the nonlinear equations behave nearly linear, and in that approximation the familiar wave equation falls out.

[0] If you zoom in to a small enough range in the graph of all but the most esoteric functions, the thing on your screen will look like a line. Try it, it's a good intuition to have.

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#43
post #37
post #18

Author here. Really excited to see Quantum Game on HN! :) Just in case, project repo is here: https://github.com/stared/quantum-game For more on learning (and teaching) quantum mechanics, see: http://p.migdal.pl/2016/08/15/quantum-mechanics-for-high-sch... And BTW: a question to you (as I guess there are many JavaScript whizz kids): how to make it more reactive?

found a bug: if i click next after completing a level before the "you won" screen pops up and subsequently click next level on the "you won" screen i can skip two levels ahead

I was just about to comment the same thing. :)

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the great explanation! If you don't mind, I had a question about '3.' I get how it's used in making your larger argument, but as a thing in itself I'm kinda lost. Part of what I'm wondering is how it's okay to say 'L(W) = 0' when earlier you described L(W) like 'L(W: wavefunction) => X: wavefunction'; so is the zero in 'L(W) = 0' just shorthand for something like 'L(W) = (f(x,t) = 0)'? (I'm also curious wh…

> it looks like it's equating the function returned by L(W) with zero There is a deeper point to be made here that I'm glad you brought up. Functions form a vector space (because they satisfy the axioms of vector behavior, basically because they can be added to each other and scaled by constant multiples). In linear algebra the symbol 0 often does double-duty as the zero vector, which is defined as the vector that do…

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks. I missed this in your original phrasing, "We can SET UP operators L(W) so that they..."—but I think I see now: equating L(W) with the zero function is algebraically convenient, since we want to solve for an unknown function/vector, and using zero there allows us to be 'agnostic' about what that unknown function/vector is (any other value would 'say something' about the unknown).

> The real question is why the addition thing works

Unfortunately I'm still at the point where I can't see why it should be surprising that it works. I'm assuming that by the 'addition thing' you are referring to the fact that adding two wave functions always produces another wave function—or maybe it's something about the characteristics of the wave function produced through adding? I'm not sure how linearity plays into things here. Maybe it's surprising that it's possible to form a linear operator (I'm assuming the "operator" you mentioned is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_map) for wave functions? I guess not though since it's probably just using the structure of those functions as vectors and it doesn't matter what they're 'about'. Nope, not sure :)

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#45
post #40

As a physics student I always hated quantum optics. IMHO the by far least intuitive field in undergrad physics. I never got. Not even a bit. Circuits, Special relativity and quantum physics in the context of atoms was so much more approachable to me. I mean, I like physics. I wonder why optics is so different. In the end all I did was learning some standard configurations of optical instruments. That and ray optics m…

It looks like it ends when the 'chosen' path clicks for that round. That is, if you have a 75% chance of going on a long path and a 25% chance of hitting a rock immediately, 25% of the time it will end quickly (and not show the possible, but not chosen, path).

I, too, found that annoying.

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it looks like it's equating the function returned by L(W) with zero There is a deeper point to be made here that I'm glad you brought up. Functions form a vector space (because they satisfy the axioms of vector behavior, basically because they can be added to each other and scaled by constant multiples). In linear algebra the symbol 0 often does double-duty as the zero vector, which is defined as the vector that do…

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks. I missed this in your original phrasing, "We can SET UP operators L(W) so that they..."—but I think I see now: equating L(W) with the zero function is algebraically convenient, since we want to solve for an unknown function/vector, and using zero there allows us to be 'agnostic' about what that unknown function/vector is (any other value would 'say something' about the unkno…

While the wavefunctions are vectors by virtue of being functions, it still remains to be seen that the set of "physically possible" wavefunctions is also a vector space. For example, if the physics were such that we were equating the local kinetic energy of a string to, I don't know, it's position or something, we would end up with an equation looking like (D_t f(x,t))^2 - f(x,t) = 0. It still can be written as an operator (not all operators are linear), but the addition thing wouldn't work anymore. It's a remarkable pattern in physics that those squared terms tend not to appear in reality.

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#48
post #18

Author here. Really excited to see Quantum Game on HN! :) Just in case, project repo is here: https://github.com/stared/quantum-game For more on learning (and teaching) quantum mechanics, see: http://p.migdal.pl/2016/08/15/quantum-mechanics-for-high-sch... And BTW: a question to you (as I guess there are many JavaScript whizz kids): how to make it more reactive?

@stared Thanks for that wonderful game. I played through all levels some months ago and really liked it. When I saw that interactive quantum link [1] on the front page today, I was reminded of your game and thought some other might like it too.

Thanks again for building it, it was the first time I could actually bring my mind to embracing quantum mechanics :-)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15902190

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#49
post #11

Reminds me of spending hours upon hours on Chip's Challenge. Unfortunately this doesn't seem mobile friendly.

Have you ever tried Chip's Challenge 2? Chuck finally got the rights back and released it recently[1]. I actually thought the second one had even more interesting computer-themed mechanics than the first one, it's a shame it was released so late. There's also a nostalgic tileset you can drop in for CC2 (depending on which version you consider nostalgic)[2]. [1] http://store.steampowered.com/app/348300/Chips_Challenge…

I had no idea there was a 2, thanks for sharing. Opening up that tileset brought memories of hours spent on certain levels flooding back!

Re: Quantum Game with Photons

#50

I can't really make sense of interference. I made it to level 6, but I didn't understand the solutions for any of the 3 previous levels. I found some of the online help, but I'm not really making any sense of what it's saying.

I also found the interference in the beam splitters surprising, although experimenting in the game let me work out enough of the logic to finish the levels.

I found an article on Wikipedia that, from the pictures, seems to be describe the process... I assume this is the simulated effect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong%E2%80%93Ou%E2%80%93Mandel...

Post reply on HN