5 ms·
OPs explanation is that entanglement is when there is a red ball and a blue ball and when you know which ball is red, you determine that the other ball must be
by Kranar 5y ago
OPs explanation is that entanglement is when there is a red ball and a blue ball and when you know which ball is red, you determine that the other ball must be blue.
My explanation is that entanglement is when there is no red ball or blue ball, there are simply two balls and the color of both balls is both red and blue simultaneously. It's not simply that one ball is red, the other is blue, but we don't know which one is which until we measure them. It's that fundamentally there is no red ball and blue ball, there are just two balls whose colors are in a superposition of red and blue.
I will try to come up with an observable difference but it's hard to do so with colors because the typical examples used for entanglement involve properties that can cancel one another out, so that two entangled particles exhibiting a superposition of two properties will, after many trials, end up forming some kind of destructive or constructive interference that would not be possible if those two particles were in a definite state.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- desmosxxx 5y agoBell's experiment itself is readily understandable to most laypeople - and comparing the outcome to what you'd expect with e.g. hidden variables is really the easiest way to see why the red/blue explanation misses the point IMO.