Question about quantum entanglement

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Further

Further

Guy
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
11,099
Likes
4,039
Points
113
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
 
GOD said:
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
Click to expand...

I don't know that they switch back and forth, but yes, if you observe one, the other has the opposite state.
Quickest way to get to acceptance of this is to picture them not as two particles, but as two aspects of a single "thing".
It's quite hard to explain, because it's so at odds with our normal reality. However, the physics does work.

barfo
 
(speculation of course on my part). first great question. second maybe Darkmatter is the force or Darkenergy
 
GOD said:
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
Click to expand...

If you replace the words entangled or entanglement with the word sin or sinning it will all become very clear.
 
barfo said:
I don't know that they switch back and forth, but yes, if you observe one, the other has the opposite state.
Quickest way to get to acceptance of this is to picture them not as two particles, but as two aspects of a single "thing".
It's quite hard to explain, because it's so at odds with our normal reality. However, the physics does work.

barfo
Click to expand...

Sorta like when you spin everything to the left, it makes you dizzy and barf-o.
 
barfo said:
picture them not as two particles, but as two aspects of a single "thing"
Click to expand...

They are part of one higher-dimensional object. They are connected outside our space.

Similarly, 2-D creatures living in a line (a 2-D universe) would not know that points they think are disconnected, actually have an arc connecting the 2 points. The arc, bending outside their linear universe, would be visible to us 3-D creatures.

As they used to say in 1970, if everyone tried acid just once, this would be a much smarter world.
 
Last edited:
jlprk said:
They are part of one higher-dimensional object. They are connected outside our space.

Similarly, 2-D creatures living in a line (a 2-D universe) would not know that points they think are disconnected, actually have an arc connecting the 2 points. The arc, bending outside their linear universe, would be visible to us 3-D creatures.

As they used to say in 1970, if everyone tried acid just once, this would be a much smarter world.
Click to expand...

The implication of your assertion would be that all points are connected through another plane making faster than speed of light travel just a matter of figuring out how to move within the alternant plane or dimension. Something sounds wrong with this, but I don't have enough knowledge to break it down.

Oh, I've had my share of acid, it helps with some things, not mathematics.
 
GOD said:
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
Click to expand...

I take it the force is always there between the two particles, it doesn't travel distance over time like light. Some what like the gravity of the Sun is always with us to bend us to our orbit, not delayed 8 minutes like the light we see. A different force to be sure, but not one forced to a rate of travel in distance and time.
 
I once got my ampallang entangled in a fourchette
 
MarAzul said:
I take it the force is always there between the two particles, it doesn't travel distance over time like light. Some what like the gravity of the Sun is always with us to bend us to our orbit, not delayed 8 minutes like the light we see. A different force to be sure, but not one forced to a rate of travel in distance and time.
Click to expand...
Gravity is slower than the speed of light. Other forces I know of all operate slower than the speed of light.

I'm just confused, I've been thinking about this question for a couple weeks.
 
Let me ask you this, GOD: can you devise a method by which quantum entanglement might be used to transmit useful information (say, something in Morse code) faster than the speed of light? If not, the speed limit of light is considered safe.

It's "spooky action at a distance", for sure, but there's no evidence that anything (in terms of energy) is actually being "transmitted" across large distances when the effect takes place.
 
GOD said:
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
Click to expand...

Seems like a correlation/causation question. Does the spin-reversal of one particle cause the spin-reversal of the other, or is an external event responsible for causing the instantaneous spin-reversal of both particles?
 
I wish I knew. Now you got my need to learn all up in arms. Gonna have to study this! Nice topic!
 
GOD said:
Two particle are entangled. They switch back and forth between up spin and down spin, always one each way. Once one is observed as either up or down spin, the paired particle will also be the opposite spin. That is my understanding of entanglement.

They have done experiments where the two particles are separated by hundreds of kilometers and still the instance one spin is observed, the other is noted to be the opposite spin. From what I understand, this instantaneous recognition of particle spin direction occurs faster than the speed of light. Is this correct? How can that be? Does this mean there is a force faster than the speed of light?

Did this question even make sense? I can try and rephrase my question if I was babbling.
Click to expand...


it makes sense, but the answer is nobody knows what's going on ontologically with QM. it's still a complete mystery. most popular interpretations do violate relativity (are "non-local"), although a few unpopular ones guess at things like temporally backwards causation attempting to preserve it.
 
TripTango said:
Let me ask you this, GOD: can you devise a method by which quantum entanglement might be used to transmit useful information (say, something in Morse code) faster than the speed of light? If not, the speed limit of light is considered safe.

It's "spooky action at a distance", for sure, but there's no evidence that anything (in terms of energy) is actually being "transmitted" across large distances when the effect takes place.
Click to expand...

Aren't they transmitting music FTL using QE?
 
TripTango said:
Let me ask you this, GOD: can you devise a method by which quantum entanglement might be used to transmit useful information (say, something in Morse code) faster than the speed of light? If not, the speed limit of light is considered safe.

It's "spooky action at a distance", for sure, but there's no evidence that anything (in terms of energy) is actually being "transmitted" across large distances when the effect takes place.
Click to expand...

Well, it does seem quite possible that something like communication (morse code) would be a great use of entanglement, however there is the problem that once a particle is observed, the entanglement is broken. So we could conceivably communicate one dot of information, but then that particle would be useless in future communication. Also, all we can do is observe, so I don't know how the mere observation can be employed as communication. So that's really two big problems with using entanglement in communication.

However, and I don't know how, but I think i do remember reading that QE is important in quantum computing. Not sure, I can't surmise how.

Anyway, I suppose this is your point, that if the QE is unusable then it's speed of action is moot. But this just seems an area where we will one day be able to exploit. Interesting either way.
 
crowTrobot said:
it makes sense, but the answer is nobody knows what's going on ontologically with QM. it's still a complete mystery. most popular interpretations do violate relativity (are "non-local"), although a few unpopular ones guess at things like temporally backwards causation attempting to preserve it.
Click to expand...
So then my questions are the same questions being asked by theoretical physicists? I just assumed there was a known answer and I was simply unaware or incapable of understanding the answer. Unfortunately, if the pros are thinking on this topic, I'll never figure it out with a laymans knowledge. Quick everyone, lets fund more research and get to the bottom of this.
 
In Star Trek terms, subspace communications technology.
 
GOD said:
Interesting, I'm dumb on the subject, but just started reading a bit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light
Click to expand...

I've seen a demonstration of it on TV. If you consider the spin to be like a bit, left is on, right is off, then you can transmit a video or audio stream, or anything else digital for that matter.

http://www.npl.washington.edu/av/altvw75.html

A controversy is presently raging in certain physics journals and conferences over whether Einstein's speed of light barrier has been breached by light itself. In particular, Prof. Günther Nimtz and his group at the University of Cologne, Germany have published results showing that they used microwaves to transmit what might be interpreted as a signal, Mozart's 40th Symphony, over a path length of 11.4 centimeters at 4.7 times the speed of light. In this column, I want to examine this faster-than-light (FTL) controversy and its implications.
 
It's quantum tunneling.
 
GOD said:
Well, it does seem quite possible that something like communication (morse code) would be a great use of entanglement, however there is the problem that once a particle is observed, the entanglement is broken. So we could conceivably communicate one dot of information, but then that particle would be useless in future communication. Also, all we can do is observe, so I don't know how the mere observation can be employed as communication. So that's really two big problems with using entanglement in communication.

However, and I don't know how, but I think i do remember reading that QE is important in quantum computing. Not sure, I can't surmise how.

Anyway, I suppose this is your point, that if the QE is unusable then it's speed of action is moot. But this just seems an area where we will one day be able to exploit. Interesting either way.
Click to expand...

Definitely interesting!

You've also nicely summed up why (so far) it's been of limited practical use -- there's no way to "force" one of the particles to take a certain spin, or to predict with certainty what it will be in advance. In effect, the observer is simply observing both particles (the local and the remote) at once, which is cool, but not communication (nor energy, force, or anything else meaningful from a classical perspective).
 
I'm by no means up to speed on this, but I was under the generic impression that particle spin was not simultaneously observable? As in, if I can observe one particle's spin, (similar to Pauli) the other must be opposite?
 
TripTango said:
Definitely interesting!

You've also nicely summed up why (so far) it's been of limited practical use -- there's no way to "force" one of the particles to take a certain spin, or to predict with certainty what it will be in advance. In effect, the observer is simply observing both particles (the local and the remote) at once, which is cool, but not communication (nor energy, force, or anything else meaningful from a classical perspective).
Click to expand...

Key words
Sender - one making the observation, attempting to send a message
Receiver - one to receive the message once the sender observes the particle

Ok, here is another idea about how to send a message, but it to has a flaw. If the sender theoretically has 1 million (arbitrary number over 1) particles, they could send a message based not on up spin or down spin recognized, but based upon which particle was observed. The observation would result in the entangled particle to choose the specific opposite spin. So once that particle is observed, the entanglement is severed. Now instead on an up or down correlating to a dot or dash, it would correlate to a pre determined message. The tie on the dorm room door meaning "getting sexy inside, stay out".

The problem is that the receiver can't know which particle has been has been observed until they look and observe, automatically severing all the entanglements making all particles appear to be separated and all the particles appear to standing for an affirmative message.

Let me know if this makes no sense, I have the unenviable task trying to explain an idea I hardly understand, even though it was my idea.
 
kingstealth said:
Im not giving up WE WILL solve the quantum entanglement issue.....in this forum!
Click to expand...
It's not about us solving it, it's about some geeks having fun trying to understand what is known, what is not known, and what can theoretically be known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top