4 ms·
I like your explanation better than the article's, but I must assume what you are saying is also a simplification (as was the article). As you stated, quantum e
by reddytowns 10y ago
I like your explanation better than the article's, but I must assume what you are saying is also a simplification (as was the article). As you stated, quantum entanglement cannot be used to send information faster than the speed of light. Yet using your rules 2 and 3, you could manipulate the odds of Bob's response by asking Alice different questions.
For clarity, is this correct (you are simplifying something) or am I reading what you wrote incorrectly?
- cousin_it 10y agoHmm, I'm pretty sure that my setup can be reproduced in a lab (to 1 significant digit) and doesn't lead to FTL communication. > Yet using your rules 2 and 3, you could manipulate the odds of Bob's response by asking Alice different questions. Can you explain in more detail? Assume that the odds of Bob's response are 50/50 at the start.
- reddytowns 10y agoNevermind, I think it makes sense to me now. The following statement is true, correct? Even though the probability that Alice and Bob's chance of both answering yes varies, the individual chance that either of them answers yes without any other information does not change.
- cousin_it 10y agoYes.