Difference between revisions of "Entangled"
(→Context) |
(→Where do We go from Here?) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Where do We go from Here?== | ==Where do We go from Here?== | ||
| + | While the future attributes of [[Entangled]] particles is shared, that does not at all mean that they can be known in advance. In fact, QM actually states that only the probability of any measurement can be known in advance. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
[[Category: Physics]] | [[Category: Physics]] | ||
Revision as of 13:41, 10 October 2023
Full Title or Meme
When two or more subatomic particles have a shared set of future attributes, they are consider to be Entangled.
Context
This characteristic of Quantum Mechanics was first noted by Schrodinger and Einstein in the early days of the development of Quantum theory.[1] Very few physicists worried about this until John Bell published a paper defining Local Realism in a way that could be tested.[2] Many scientists (and philosophers) have tested the concept of Local Realism, since it appears to be required by relativity, but is is quite clear now that it is a theory that has been conclusively falsified. This does, if fact, prove that quantum mechanics, as understood in the early years, is incomplete. Which is what Einstein claimed in the EPR paper.[3]
Where do We go from Here?
While the future attributes of Entangled particles is shared, that does not at all mean that they can be known in advance. In fact, QM actually states that only the probability of any measurement can be known in advance.
References
- ↑ Anton Zeilinger, Dance of the Photons p. 243 ISBN 978-0374239664
- ↑ John Bell, On the EPR Paradox Physics 1 (1964) 195-200 https://journals.aps.org/ppf/pdf/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195
- ↑ APS News, Einstein and the EPR Paradox https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200511/history.cfm#:~:text=In%20a%201935%20paper%2C%20Einstein%2C%20Boris%20Podolsky%20and,demonstrate%20the%20innate%20conceptual%20difficulties%20of%20quantum%20theory.
