5 ms·
Does the entanglement affect between particles propagate at the speed of light or instantaneous?
by tus88 6y ago
Does the entanglement affect between particles propagate at the speed of light or instantaneous?
- andi999 6y agoNo affect propagates
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Crash0v3rid3 6y agoSuppose you had two entangled particles light-years distance apart. Observer A observes one entangled particle at a spin up. At the same time, Observer B observes particle B at a spin down. Observer A's observation of a spin up means observer B must see a spin down. However, the two observers are restricted at the speed of light to communicate this to each other. It would initially seem like there is a instantaneous causal impact based on observer A's observation. But that's not the case. I tend to think it was predestined what each observer see, but that leads to all sorts of philosophical questions. I hope I did this topic justice, I find it quite interesting but have no background in it.
- annilt 6y agoThe article is about that. Bell inequalities proved there isn’t ‘predestined’ effect(If you mean ‘hidden variables’ by that)
- derbOac 6y agoBut isn't superdeterminism still possible? I thought that was implied by the article's first assumption that physics was loathe to abandon, that the experimenters had free will, so to speak.
- andreareina 6y agoIs superdeterminism even falsifiable?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- fsh 6y agoNone of the interpretations of quantum mechanics are. By design, they all predict exactly the same outcome for any conceivable experiment. The subject is entirely philosophical, not scientific.
- andreareina 6y agoThey make predictions, which can be falsified. They even make different predictions---Scott Aaronson agrees that WF poses problems for the standard Copenhagen interpretation. Sean Carroll is on record somewhere saying that e.g. objective collapse models predict an in principle measurably different evolution of a system's entropy than many worlds. I suppose I should have asked what predictions SD actually makes.
- fsh 6y agoObjective-collapse theory is a modification of QM, not merely an interpretation. Superdeterminism on the other hand is not even a theory. It cannot be falsified by design.
- tsimionescu 6y agoCopenhagen Interpretation and MWI don't make different predictions from each other, but there are other theories that do. For example, pilot-wave theory makes different predictions. There are also some superdeterminist theories that make new predictions (Gerard T'Hooft is one advocate of such theories, I believe). Unfortunately I don't know of any concrete examples. Here is some more information on the subject from Sabine Hossenfelder: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-forgotten-solution-superdeterminism.html?m=1 http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-forgotten-solut...
- andreareina 6y agoNo local hidden variables. Unless there's been a new development?
- annilt 6y agoYes, you’re right. I meant local hidden variables.
- andreareina 6y agoAww. I was hoping for a new development haha.
- alisonkisk 6y agoGlobal hidden variables are the predestined effect. The argument against global hidden variables is that it requires a godlike meddling in the whole universe to populate an infinite amount of arbitrary asymmetric details.
- annilt 6y agoAccepted as instant.
- Myto 6y agoThat's just false.
- annilt 6y agoThen explain it / give us a link please.
- Myto 6y agoWhy do I need to do that, to combat your unsupported assertion? Why don't you show some evidence instead that faster than light entanglement has been "accepted"? The fact is, there are theories of QM that do not assume that entanglement happens faster than light. The Many Worlds theory is one that has no need for such hypothesis. And more generally, since you need to send the results via a classical (no faster than light) communication method, there's no way to be sure that the entanglement has happened faster than light.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- redlock 6y agohttps://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/15282/quantum-entanglement-faster-than-speed-of-light https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/15282/quantum-en... And here is some experimental data http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0614v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0614v1.pdf
- mhh__ 6y agoThere is a so-called "no-go" theorem dealing with this. To actually collect information, you need to transmit data via some classical method i.e. the hou-c always wins
- d_tr 6y agoSystems get entangled with each other by interacting. So entanglement cannot "propagate" faster than the fastest possible "mediator" of an interaction, which is the speed of light. The "instantaneous" aspect comes up in entanglement and measurement. Say you start off with an entangled pair of electrons A and B in your lab, and measure electron A. Measurement is an interaction, so you become entangled with the electron. By knowing the initial entangled state and your reading of electron A's state, you can know stuff about the state of electron B at the time of the measurement, even if electron B has traveled a very long distance in the meantime. I personally find this point of view nicer than assuming that I somehow collapsed electron A's state and caused an instantaneous remote collapse of B's state.