
Human eye may be able to detect quantum entanglement - soundsop
http://arxivblog.com/?p=1230
======
swombat
_Could it be that Gisin thinks there is more to entanglement than meets the
eye?_

Ooooh, I love the smell of a cheap, cheap joke in the morning :-)

Regarding the actual question, I think this is a case of garnering publicity
(and attached funding) rather than of needing eyes to test entanglement.
Instruments have served as adequate "observers" for some time now as far as I
know, so I don't think there are any philosophical implications to having a
human observer as opposed to any other kind of observer.

------
jacquesm
interesting details:

[http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Quantum/see_a_photon.h...](http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Quantum/see_a_photon.html)

------
jimrandomh
While I'm sure that a human eye counts as an observer for purposes of
collapsing quantum wavefunctions, I'm pretty sure that an inert brick of clay
is, too.

------
time_management
It's asking me for a password and snubbing me when I don't have one.

~~~
markup
You can read it through google's cache:
[http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:EP3z1pmfq1EJ:arxivblog.c...](http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:EP3z1pmfq1EJ:arxivblog.com/+the+physics+arXiv+blog&hl=it&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=safari)
"Human eye could detect spooky action at a distance".

