Heisenberg uncertainty solved ?

[UniqueMixture]

The findings build on recent challenges to Heisenberg's principle by scientists the world over. Nagoya University physicist Masanao Ozawa suggested in 2003 that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle does not apply to measurement, but could only suggest an indirect way to confirm his predictions. A validation of the sort he proposed was carried out last year by Yuji Hasegawa's group at the Vienna University of Technology. In 2010, Griffith University scientists Austin Lund and Howard Wiseman showed that weak measurements could be used to characterize the process of measuring a quantum system. However, there were still hurdles to clear as their idea effectively required a small quantum computer, which is difficult to build. "In the past, we have worked experimentally both on implementing weak measurements, and using a technique called 'cluster state quantum computing' to simplify building quantum computers. The combination of these two ideas led to the realization that there was a way to implement Lund and Wiseman's ideas in the lab," says Rozema. It is often assumed that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle applies to both the intrinsic uncertainty that a quantum system must possess, as well as to measurements. These results show that this is not the case and demonstrate the degree of precision that can be achieved with weak-measurement techniques

 

[sprinkles]

This is pretty cool but it more or less affirms the uncertainty principle rather than 'solving' it.

It also seems like they are mixing up the observer effect into the uncertainty principle, when they are really separate things.

The fact that they had to do a 'weak measurement' supports the principle - the more you can know about one property, the less you know about the other property - so they are basically getting around this by not knowing very much of the property at once.

This actually supports the principle. They would not have to do this workaround if it were not true. It just means that they might have to rephrase it a bit.

 

[WALMART]

I've been reading articles like this since 2004 that were written in '93



My guess is, is that 'exact' location will evade us, and we will only be able to massively parallelize our predictions.