4 ms·
Saying it happens "instantly" implies a preferred frame, but the process is invariant under Lorentz boosts. It also assumes a specific way of representing the
by Strilanc 4y ago
Saying it happens "instantly" implies a preferred frame, but the process is invariant under Lorentz boosts.
It also assumes a specific way of representing the quantum state (eg a state vector over all parts) whereas other representations like Feynman paths have no corresponding notion of an instant change.
- jquery 4y agoInstantly implies FTL. How is that incorrect? The effect is very much FTL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_pseudo-telepathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_pseudo-telepathy
- Strilanc 4y agoWhat I'm trying to convey is that the statement "entanglement is instant" is implementation dependent. You can meet the specifications of quantum mechanics using a simulator where entanglement is instantaneous, but you can also meet those specifications using a simulator where entanglement is not instantaneous or where that concept doesn't even type check. What we can objectively say is that entanglement doesn't care about the distinction between time-like separation and space-like separation. If two non-communicating parties are entangled and they perform an experiment, there is no observable distinction between the cases where one of them goes first or the other goes first or in whether there is time for light to travel between them in the delay between their two parts. But that is much looser than requiring the effect to be instantaneous in some unspecified frame, because only requiring that there's no observable distinction is a much looser constraint than specifying that it must be instantaneous. And the only thing that we can experimentally verify is the looser constraint.