Einstein's brilliant mistake: Entangled states - Chad Orzel
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июн 2024
- View full lesson: ed.ted.com/lessons/einstein-s-...
When you think about Einstein and physics, E=mc^2 is probably the first thing that comes to mind. But one of his greatest contributions to the field actually came in the form of an odd philosophical footnote in a 1935 paper he co-wrote -- which ended up being wrong. Chad Orzel details Einstein's "EPR" paper and its insights on the strange phenomena of entangled states.
Lesson by Chad Orzel, animation by Gunborg/Banyai.
That Win moment when you're so smart even your mistakes are brilliant.
+Harut Rehanyan lol so true, good call
+Harut Rehanyan you're*
mattyboy141 what? I spelt it correctly. Y u tryna be a Nazi??
+Harut Rehanyan nice edit fool
+Harut Rehanyan Like GreatScotts one in his LED matrix ;P
Einstein: *makes a mistake*
Everyone: Incredible job
Thank you.
It was not a mistake. At that time is was the best he could have done.
yup, because that mistake actually challenged the theory fundamentally, and required scientists to develop the theory substantially and discover new things in order to respond to it
Ok
t. y. v. m. a. e\\
I DON'T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING BUT THE ANIMATIONS WERE SO COOL
+paco putonberbenero Best coment.
+paco putonberbenero thanks paco
+paco putonberbenero welcome to the club
im 10 and I understood everything
+sahar Tejani Then explain what quantum mechanics are.
This is one of the better explanations of this topic for the general public and it's still hard to grasp. I wrote a paper about the EPR paradox over 20 years ago for a philosophy course. It was my first introduction to quantum mechanics and my mind was blown. Impressive blast radius; I'm still picking up the pieces....
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
- Richard Feynman
Mind blown
It says that if you think u understand quantum mechanics u r wrong bcoz the whole quantum mechanics is wrong so ur understanding something wrong.
It's common sense as Einstein told us
So basically, quantum state is fake? As it should be? But I thought Bose Einstein condensate was quantum!
And what if you can manipulate an entangled particle?
@@dynamitrex3975 The main question is how two particles can depend on one another that are billions of km away from each other and if you change one particle, the other particle also changes that means that the information of change may have traveled faster than speed of light.if something is faster than speed of light it makes wrong the whole spacetime continuum.
I will have to watch this several more times before my brow un-furrows
You'll have to read a lot of physics before your brow unfurrows
Manashi Sarkar You got that right, cousin
@@WeeWeeJumbo As far as I know even people as Richard Feynman (The Genious) didn't know why and how but knew it's there.
That sad moment when you don't understand even after the narrator patronizes you
I think like half of this went right over my head...
If u really want to know this while understanding it, check out fermilab. They have very simple and presice explanations.
Einstein , the man who was right even when he was wrong!
That could be the greatest compliment for anyone
Big E denied quantum mechanics so...
He wasn't close to being right. He was respected however and so it made the other brilliant physicists take a closer look at entanglement. Thanks to them, not Einstein, we enjoy things like quantum computing capabilities. BTW, I love Albert E.
@@baashaalbaashaal6427 He merely claimed that the Copenhagen Interpretation was incomplete cuz its laid on the foundation of quantum particles capable of positing an endless number of states, i.e., quantum indeterminacy was fundamental
QM is a discipline of physics
No one can deny a discipline of physics😁
Hnm
Man. Even Einstein's "wrong" paper launched whole new branches of science. What a mind.
Alain Aspect got Nobel Prize in Physics for his experiments on Bell's Inequality. Truly amazing.
great video but they somehow managed to write "spukhafte Fernwirkung" with 3 typos at 2:45
They just accidentally put a ‘l’ in the middle of k and u
And Spuckhafte Ferwirkung is a real word
@@chiefsed4473 No, correct German would be "spukhafte Fernwirkung"
Oh yeah I thought it spelled spukhafte ferwiklung
@@lukasmihara yeah correct
I was looking for this comment! Was itching to write down the error somewhere in the comments
When I took undergraduate physics at university there were a handful of results that still stay with me now that I'm not at all involved in hard sciences. Two of the most mind boggling quantum phenomena involved simple experiments with light. So imagine you have a long rectangular prism about a metre long but otherwise fairly narrow. Shaped like a box for storing a dozen roses. It's black all over and completely blocks out all light. At one end you have a variable laser that you can adjust so that its intensity is so low it's guaranteed to be spitting out photons so slowly there's only ever 1 photon in the whole tube at any given time. Near the other end is a piece of card with two vertical slits and at the very end there's a light detector. If you did quantum in school you'll know light interferes with itself so you get these waves on the light detector if the light has to go through two slits. However, this experiment shows that the light will still interfere with itself as long as there are two slits even though there's only ever one photon in the tube! So the photon somehow 'knows' there's another slit on the card that it's not going though! I never got an explanation that I could follow as to why this works. Of course if you replace the two slits with one slit the pattern changes to the standard Gaussian distribution with no interference.The other really cool result you can try for yourself if you have three polarizing sunglasses. So polarizing sunglasses work by filtering out light if it's not aligned the right way. If you hold up the lens a particular way it might let through 100% of the up-down oscillating rays, 50% of the 45 deg incline rays and 0% of the side to side oscillating rays. Now if you get two pairs of sunglasses you can put the lenses next to each other and turn them until you find all of the light is being blocked (one lens blocks all the up down and the other blocks all the side to side). However, as the orientation of the light is probabilistic, once the light passes through a lens it updates its probability of what orientation it is travelling in. So if you get a third lens and stick it between your first two lenses, by carefully turning the middle lens you can actually get some light making it through all three lenses when two of them would have blocked ALL the light.
The interference pattern with light has to do with the fact that photons, electrons, etc. can be thought of as both waves and particles. Before an electron/photon is measured, you can think of it as a wave rather than particle, though when it is measured, the wave-like behavior 'collapses', so to speak, and it may behave more like a particle, in the sense we think of them. I believe the wave-like behavior of the light is retained, even in a single photon, because it is only measured after it has encountered the slits. I'm already out of my depth with physics here (I'm only really familiar with classical mechanics), but perhaps this has to do with fundamental particles being described as wavelike excitations of a field in QFT.
Doesn't refraction through the lens change the axes of polarized light?
About the duality of wave and particle of matter, you got the fact right. If photons are shone one at a time at a double slit, each photon (or electron, if used) will hit a single spot on the screen behind. The cumulative pattern, however, or probability distribution on the screen will follow a "double-slit" pattern, aka interference. Now you wonder how can the photon/electron know the existence of the other slit, and you put a detector at the double slit to see exactly which slit each photon/electron passes through each time, the interference pattern will be destroyed, and all you will ever see are two bright dots on the screen, as what you would see if you shoot a gun through a wall with two narrow windows. By measuring its precise position at the slit, you destroyed its wave property, leaving it with 100% particle property. Hence no more interference, only the straight paths are left.
@@SrhamSaeed when I wear sunglasses that are the super light polarizing type I have discovered that with my LCD cell phone I can read it and see the images fine in portrait but not in landscape which suggests that I should get a pair of frames that has circular lenses for a second pair for when I am in multimedia mode video mode widescreen or whatever you want to call it.
Obviously copyleft of any intellectual property here especially the fact that no sunglasses are marketed for use with smartphones in landscape not just having lenses that you can rotate. I think that this is the way summer 3D glasses work as well.
My body doesn't generate sufficient lubrication so I have to always protect my eyes from winds even if they are clean but especially if they are not.
I am curious if I can avoid this issue by using the organic screens for example I highly recommend the Samsung a 20 but it is not the first affordable phone that had the OLED for example the j-7 and for a while the Motorola X was available with Republic Wireless so that it's higher up front cost could be justified my only paying $10 for unlimited minutes texting Etc and anything that uses data being minimal or Wi-Fi dependent.
That's the light slit experiment, isn't it?
What I understood : nothing absolutely nothing
TED-Ed you made a mistake @2:45 its not "Spuckhafte Ferwirklung" its "Spukhafte Fernwirkung" your made 3 mistakes in 2 words. WELL DONE
+Kymate :-) Spuckhaft would be something related to spit.
Ben Pyke yes, spucken is "to spit" and spukhaft without the c means something like "mysterious" and Fernwirkung means something like long-distance effect. so its "mysterious long-distance effect"
Kymate Ja, ich weiß ;-) Mein Kommentar war nicht als Antwort auf deinen gemeint, sondern als Erweiterung. Deiner vielleicht auch. :-)
Ben Pyke ja war mir nich sicher deshalb hab ich noch was dazu geschrieben
"It's" and "you"
2:43 That sign should say "Spukhafte Fernwirkung"
Funny enough the jibberish creation "Ferwirklung" almost works as a portmanteau of "Fernwirkung" and "Verwicklung" (entanglement)!
A brilliant mistake on the side of Chad Orzel?
Palace Of Wisdom Kuzuzangpo
Hmmm yeah
'Ferwirklung' is not a word in German. It's 'Fernwirkung', which means 'action at a distance'.
If you get this then congrats: Achnee
whoever the narrator is...he's smooooth. good to listen to. clear, articulate.
This is as hard as it can get.
You underestimate it's power...
Not even close.
1:59 to 2:04 - "IF both particles are measured at 0, the relationship will always hold." I do not understand why that implies that they are entangled. This is no different than we would expect.
IF one particle is measured at 0, THEN it will always remain as 0 (unless there is an intervening measurement of A/B)... and if the second particle is also measured at 0, then it will always remain at 0. So IF the particles HAPPEN to match the first time they are measured... then they will always match. Would we expect anything different? Wouldn't the corollary also be true? If one particle measured at 0 and the other measured at 1, then they will always be opposite no matter how far apart you move them, no?
More information is needed to explain why this indicates an entanglement between the two particles. For instance, if we have one source of a dozen particles and measure the first particle at A, does that mean that we can predict with 100% accuracy that the remaining eleven particles will also be A? In which case, it seems that a property of the source is determining whether all the particles emitted from it are A or B.
Also, if we then measure the first particle at 1, does that then mean we can predict with 100% certainty that all the remaining eleven particles are also 1?
Better yet, suppose we measure particle X at 1, and particle Y also at 1... Then we measure particle X at A... does that then give us a 50% chance that particle Y will change from 1 to 0? Or is particle Y not scrambled by the A/B measurement to X in the same way that X is scrambled? In which case, did we not just disprove that X and Y are "entangled" and proven that they were only the same in the original measurement by chance and would expect them to remain the same until an intervening A/B measurement caused them to change 50% of the time?
Schroedinger's particle basically
+Lorde exactly what i though
I assume that was a reference to Schrödinger's cat.. If so, then no, entanglement is different: in the cat case, there is one measurable state for one object, which is determined only when the measurement is actually made; however, entanglement involves correlations between states of multiple (say two) objects, and determining the state of one object "instantaneously" determines the state of the other object (no matter how far away). It was the "instantaneous" character of this process that bothered Einstein and others, since special relativity is so firmly grounded that current quantum theories are based on it, and one of the things special relativity did was to show that simultaneity is not an objective physical condition.
This video is the most clear explanation of Entangled States.
Maybe they are connected through the extra dimensions that string theory suggests which is why they seemingly can get the information there faster than light but since we can't detect the dimensions we can't see it? And Before anyone jumps on me yes I'm talking out of my ass and have no idea if its true or even possible but hey, just an idea. :)
I am actually SOOOO happy to see, that i am not the only person on this planet, who has had this idea. It would explain a lot and save the hidden variable option. The problem is: how to possibly scientifically research this (quite wilde) hypothesis ?
I think: from the start "Big Bang" they are already connected or synced" not really a continue linked signal
I think there exits another way for information to "travel"...if it travels, it has to follow Einstein law, but if is instantaneous, then what you said makes sense as if that were true, the information isn't actually travelling..
Idk
Specifically regarding the portion of the video from about 1:00 to 1:20... how do we know that the state (1 or 0) is not determined until the measurement is taken?
Also, suppose we take a measurement and find that it is 1, why would we find it strange that when we measure it again later, it is also 1? Why would we expect it to change from the first measurement to the next?
Something seems to be missing in the explanation.
So Einstein himself opposed his theory so he is always correct.
I can think such thoughts but why..
The animation is very good,so cute particler! kids can understand Quantum entanglement with it.Hi and love from Sweden !
Thank you i get information a lot
2:44 Not sure if “Spukhafte Ferwirklung” was purposely spelled wrong, which is interesting because the second word can be treated as “Verwirkung” meaning “forfeit”, “Verwicklung” meaning “entanglement” and the “correct” word “Fernwirkung” which means “action in distance”.
I like that 'for now' bit... I'm still waiting for those quantum routers.
Amazing thoughts right there. And the thought about quantum computers is just out of my comprehension.
But with the little information i'm given and i understand, i'd like to point something :
if there are only 2 states available for each particule, doesn't it mean that there are not only 2 entangled particles, but perhaps a lot more at the same time ?
The lesson went over my head
yeah tbh i don't get this at all
The world leaders in the field still don't completely get it.
Technoguy3 I get it, u people dont get it becuz yall dont have *FAITH*!
Oh snap! Oh Burn! OOOoooohhhhh~~~~ in ur asss!
Jet fuel can't melt DEEZ NUTS!
This video did a terrible job of explaining things. Let me explain it to you. Sometimes, particles can be entangled. This means that the measurement of one particle can determine the characteristics of another particle.
Nobody get it
Universe 7 actually many people do get this phenomena .
Can it be that four dimensional spacetime is infinitely curved in higher dimension and by entanglement particles can interact through the higher dimension resulting the action to be correlated and instantaneous regardless of spacial distance?
Could be. This is basically the ER=EPR conjecture (Wormholes = Entanglement). ER for wormhole (Einstein-Rosen bridge) EPR for quantum entanglement (EPR paradox)
You prople are real freak.
I still don't know what they are exactly measuring. All I'm getting is that they measure something about 2 particles, don't know how the two relate, and determining what "state" they are in. And that if you measure 1 then you know the state of both which could help with faster communication if they could control it... but they can't. This is like the 3rd video of this but still not 100%. I get the concept but not the details
WOW! That is DEEP! Great video.
And it's the latest paper. ‘Quantum teleportation-based state transfer of photon polarization into a carbon spin in diamond’
Nice video. Just a qn if its ok. Got here due to curiosity abt how Einstein was said to be wrong with his "spooky action at a distance". So the qn is why do we know that the measured physical properties of entangled particles aren't predetermined prior measurement?
Did look up some wiki pages about hidden variables and Bells Theorem etc but didnt feel like I learnt much from them except how his inequalities were violated etc.. Alot of it sounds overly complicated and round about. I get how the properties are random and we have to measure to know it and how entanglement led to correlation. But not sure how that concludes as Einstein being wrong. For instance, the properties that are unknown until measured surely can be considered a "hidden variable" even though that may not be exactly what he meant when he said that. I guess its more like a known variable whose value or state is indeterminate but I guess I just need to know why is it necessarily assumed to have meant to be uncorrelated based on what Einstein said?
Any good clean way to explain it all?
Forgot to add. My unds of the topic is obviously weak. For instance I seem to unds that entanglement suggest definite correlation between physical properties of a particle pair but I somehow still feel that if I changed the properties of one particle, somehow, the entanglement nature will fall apart? (Correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway, so does making measurements count as external influence or interaction somewhat similar as how I would make a change in a physical property?
물리학자들 사이에서 양자역학이 논란거리가 되었다는 사실은 알고 있었지만, 아인슈타인도 양자역학을 부정했다는 점을 이 영상을 보고 처음 알게 되었습니다. 이런 영상들을 보며 세상은 우리가 생각하는 것보다 훨씬 복잡하다는 것을 항상 느끼고 있습니다. 앞으로도 좋은 영상 기대하겠습니다.
안녕하세요 안녕하세요 좋은 댓글입니다 저는 인도에서 왔습니다
If the tool u use affect the measurement, then how reliable result can u get?
And things get even stranger when I understand each word but have no idea what this video is trying to tell me.
So, if I were to take two particles that are entagled and smash one of them in a particle accelerator; would the other one explode, too?
Good question.
Would be cool but thats not the case. The explanation are always misleading into thinking something like that would work but actually only the quantum states are connected not a whole particle. e.g. the spin of a particle. You can imagine it has a rotation (even though it is not really rotation). You measure one particle and find a rotation of 90 degrees and then you measure the other one and you will always find 90 degrees as well even though they are far apart. If you would try to smash something in it it would change the state of the particle and the entanglement is gone :/ It also only works with reading. Changing something yourself breaks the entanglement. So you can't really send a message or make something explode somewhere else.
You can't break nor create particles
I'm not german, and I'm just relying on Google Translate, but @2:45 "spuckhafte ferwirklung" translates to "spitting effect," whereas "spukhafte fernwirkung" translates to "spooky long-distance effect."
There's a typo in "spukhafte Fernwirkung". "Spuckhafte Fernwirkung" as written in the video is "spitting-kind-of effect over distance".
I don't know why I find spooky action at a distance so fucking funny.
This is what EDI explains to Shepard in how the Ilusive Man comunicates with the Normandy
why is it that the first measurement goes away once you take a different one?
If A is 0 must i look at B in the same moment to find out it's 0 too? The video places the measurements apart in time a millisecond or so, how long is the same state kept between particles?
spukhafte Fernwirkung not spuckhafte Ferwirklung! = remote action
Can anyone tell me what exactly these "paired particles" are and how did they got them?
I wish everyone had access to these kind of videos.
What about transmitting information this way:
You measure one particle A) in 1 direction, and the other, B) in that same direction plus another one. Since A is measured solely in one direction, it will remain the same. So, if B is measured again in the original direction it wil yield the same result, always.
Now, if we stop A for a moment and don't measure its properties, B will be free to be in whichever state it so desires, so we will sometimes see an opposite value. If measured often enough, this bit of information can be very reliable.
And if A was to change according to B, we can flip the whole thing over: if A measures continuity, B is not being measured and if A measures 2 different values, B is being measured.
So does this mean that we CAN send information this way?
I think the problem is it's like the entangled particles are like two coins tossed in the air. Until one is measured it's in a super position of BOTH heads & tales (or seems to be - no one knows) but when one is measured the 50 / 50 probability of either a heads or a tales becomes either one or the other. So we can't know in advance what that will be therefore something like morse code: a 0 or a 1 can't work (heads or tales) because there's no way to agree that what each part of a message can be making it useless.
What sorts of properties are they talking about measuring? And how are they actually measured?
Also, what makes 2 particles be entangled with each other. Is it the fact that they were emitted by the same thing?
Is this similar to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle?
There's a mistake at 2:44: It's called "Spukhafte Fernwirkung" and not "Spuckhafte Ferwirklung"
The issue is one of whether or not quantum mechanics is complete. At the ensemble level the Schroedinger equation makes predictions correct to one part in 10^12, and I think we can take it for granted that this could just as well be one part in 10^100 or well beyond the Planck level. There is nothing like a viscosity term to be added to the SE. Modification of the SE is prohibited, which applies also to the Dirac or any similar equation. QM would be an easy subject if it were permitted, and any sensible natural philosopher will realise the unlikelihood of such permission being given. QM is complete at the ensemble level.
At the level of the discrete or individual event, we obviously need some other idea to get an outcome where a cat is either dead or alive, and never in a mixture of states. This other idea needs to be orthogonal to the SE in some way. Without knowing anything about Bell's Theorem, we need to be looking at the superluminal world anyway. There is more than one way to travel faster than light, so the SE could describe an oscillation in the way that exchanges spacelike and timelike intervals. We can have tachyonic Brownian motion in the other way, which can induce a broken symmetry when the entity interacts with two or more detectors, so only one detector gets the prize. This is an idea for computer simulation using a random number generator and there is a long way to go. Other ideas are welcome, but please be aware of the basic principle that we cannot modify the SE.
Does entangled states become less entangled over time due to interactions? Because, is Big Bang were to be true, then all the particles came out of one flash of energy which is equivalent to a prepared initial state implying everything is entangled with everything else... Or does this only work for matter - antimatter pair?
good animation
probably the only ted-ed video i didnt understand 😅😅
why they have to send a signal to each other? I didn't understand why necessary they communicate? if they only exist like opposites and similar things?
Albert Einstein dismissed this as Spooky Action At A Distance, or SAAAD. This is because he was SAAAD it was not Halloween.
Regarding "spooky action at a distance" (and undefined superposition states in general), Einstein (a pantheist/pandeist) famously said "God does not play dice!"
Niels Bohr, in arguably one of the greatest roast responses ever, replied "Einstein, stop telling God what to do."
So a source can "spit out" two "particles" (light spits out as a particle and a wave) that are always correlated anytime you measure them. If one is 0 then the other is B, if one is 1 then the other is A, but they always change their status between 0,1 for first and A, B for the second. No matter where particle 1 and particle 2 are, even a million km apart, there is always an instant correlation between them however and when they are measured. For instance, light (source) acts either as a particle (particle 1) or as a wave (particle 2).
This is the coolest thing ever
Erm...
It's a bit hard to wrap my mind around... like most of quantum strangeness of our world...
So if we have a pair of particles originating from one source and we measure 1-st particle as "1" if we measure second particle we get "1" (that if the entanglement correlation is "always equal", other way we might get a pretetermined "0")
But if we measure 1-st particle on it's different property we get random result "A" or "B" and at the same time we reset the "1"/"2" proberty to being undetermined again.
So if we measure 1-st particle on "1"/"2" and keep those measurements if someone performes an "A"/"B" measurement we get a 50% chance to get a different result on first particle. Right?
So if we perform like 100 measurement per second on first particle, and check - if all measurements yelded the same result - we can count this as "0 transmitted" And if during this second we get some spontanious result change we can count this as "1 transmitted" and this way have a binary datastream that is limited by it's banwdth speed (1b/s in this example which is a crappy speed), but is totally independant of distance.
True - this relies on the itea that out of 50 subsequant measuments with undeterminder results some will yeld different results which is not certain ofcource, but after all convetional binary data transmissions we have now are also not 100% reliable and thus we have methods of identifying and fixing occasional bit-leacks in datasteams using encodings...
I love these vids so much!!!!!
Love the way he throws speculation out as FACT!! At 2:20 he states, if you measure one in New York and the
other in San Francisco, they gives the same results. YET the longest published test so far is just a few hundred
kilometers! He's inferring, if you can run around the block without stopping, then you can run around the world
without stopping, to eat, to sleep, to rest...because you just proved you can run around a block without stopping!
There's too many unknown variables, magnetic fields and such that can easily influence the entanglement. But
it makes them FEEL, I understand all...there's nothing we don't know! You can't understand, but I do! Look at me!
I seriously did not understand a word that was said... Good there are people who does! =)
I am curious, I know they meant these measurements in a broad sense, resulting in the same results. But what exactly were these measurement? Weight? Energy? Proton counts? Size? Movement pattern?
Exactly what is identical between the two particles?
What happens to the other particle if the entangled particle it was attached to is turned into energy, would this mean energy and matter still retain information together? Or does the particle simply find a different particle to attach to?
I realize asking HOW this happens would be something that is probably we won't know til decades, hundreds of years if ever. But I will still ask... just incase we do actually know.
"Identical" particles means they are both electrons or protons or whatever.
2:44 I really dont think it's spelled like that.
This video is the perfect cure for constipation. Just watching it makes my stomach hurt.
What if there were two observers at both ends, continuously observing the states of the two entangled particles simultaneously after fixed time intervals? Would the states of two particles be opposite to each other every instant of time both of the observers measure their states? Let's suppose "A" and "B" are two states, and measurement time instants are 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5. And assume that the states measured by first observer for instants 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 are A, B, A, A, & B respectively. Would this imply that for the second observer, measured states for instants 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 be B, A, B, B, & A respectively? If that's the case, then the notion of quantum entanglement is pretty bizarre.
Actually I was hoping an explanation for How and why the Entangled states exist/work.
Hmmm... is there also a possibility that it might also be linked to multiverse... where that particle communicates to the other particle because it is at that exact moment at the exact time that it was measured in the other universe?
And if you start with two, entangled pairs, and carry them apart such that their lines-of-sight intercept (line-through-line at a point)-do the pairs interfere, with each other....
"standing on the shoulders of giants" everyone has a small part to play
maybe is like a program which can change everything since is sending signals to particles directly instead of make particles sending mensages each others....
what if there is a athor dimension that isn't relative to the three space dimensions. this way it can have the same effect as a wormhole. but than not by bending spacetime but by an crossing fift dimension.
He called it spooky 😂
Einstein made a mistake but mistake was brilliant! What can you say about this man... Respect!!!
2:45 I speak German
There is no “C”.
You forgot the “N” and there is no “L”.
It’s “ Spukhafte Fernwirkung”
Particles are like
Can we go home now?
Brain.exe has stopped working
Starts speaking gibberish at 3:50 in a child-speak voice. "The little man wearing a red hat turns the hat green and not inside out at the same time as the other hat turns blue" - oh yes, simple.
I love that cartoon "Relativity Police" I need a tshirt of that !!
"relativity is safe .... for now "
Lol
How are particles measured? How can these paired particles be "moved" to another location in order to be measured?
I Googled it and found out that entangled particles are created when a photon is split into two. This made me more confused with more questions like how can a photon be further split, etc.
*Help* I dont know how to make the Square Root sign or the Squared sign how do I? I usually just copy and paste the symbol thingys like √ that which I just stole from the internet but I usually do a slash / and the 2 I dont know either and dont copy and paste I use a normal 2 which is actually confusing but not confusing if you think its confusing and than think if its not confusing and just look at it for 1 second and realize *Oh hey thats simple* cause the end would be 2 like obviously and Im not typing about the answer but that is what I could be typing about but Im so like not cause if it were 22=4 like duh it wouldnt be 22=42 because 2x2 isnt 42 and 2x2 isnt 2 cause that wouldnt make sense and like -2x-2 wouldnt be 2 because it would be the same answer!! *I just need help typing the sign on IOS so yeah dont go through my long speech about realizing that nothing doesnt make sense*
Can somebody also detect a typo around minute 1:00? The number of measures and property confused me a lot. EDIT: That was the only thing that confused me in the video xD
A Ted Ed a day
Keeps school away
can someone correct me on this but is it no just that they seem entagled because of giving the right results could it not be from the big bang giving birth to particles all same time that they stay same property
-_-
No because the really really really weird thing about Quantum Entanglement is that WE can choose it's value ourselves. This is because there are detectors which can see whether a photon is in either a wave or particle form & if you aren't measuring which it acts like a wave i.e. in all possible positions but as soon as you look at it close up to see how one photon can be everywhere at once BAM! It's suddenly in one place just because it's being watched. Stop watching it & it seems to know & it's everywhere again. This even happens AFTER it's left the transmitter so your actions re-write history -your viewing it changes the past! - Or at least it seems to. In truth no one has a clue of what's really going on which is why it bother Einstein so much. He went to his grave completely perplexed by how it seems to know whether or not it is being watched!
+Logic Reason Evidence what do you mean it's suddenly in 1 place? does it stops moving?
The number of elementary particles is not fixed, but varies due to what is called spontaneous creation and annihilation of virtual particles. You might patch up your notion to include that, but anyway it doesn't work; the properties change during measurement in such a way that measuring some properties completely randomizes other "orthogonal" properties. Current quantum theory of measurement considers that the measuring device and the measured object acquire correlated states, which fixes a long-standing concern with the Copenhagen interpretation (wherein measuring devices forced a "jump" of the measured object from a mixed state into a definite state, think Schrödinger's cat).
I could only understand this with being high on Hemp, my mind has turned into supercomputer
Actually it's "Spukhafte Fernwirkung" and not "Spuckhafte Fenwirkung" (that's actually quite funny since "Spuck-" is derived from the verb "spucken" -> to spit; so it would be spitful/spitting action at a distance)
Bell didn't show that there aren't hidden variables (that there's no "pre-measurement" state of the entangled system). He showed that quantum mechanics isn't local, whether or not there are hidden variables.
*Einstein was so great, that even his mistakes were great 😸*
What if something does limit the distance between particles and is just currently hidden?
i think you is smart and i very like your video thank so much:))
Make a video on 'why spokes are used in wheels and why they are cross each other?? '
Are the two particles; aside from being measured against each other; completely unrelated?
Good question! But no, they always share a relation to one another, like they're both formed in the splitting of one larger compound into two smaller entangled pieces (e.g. two electrons that were once in a molecule together). But unless explicitly measured they might remain entangled for ages, then separate from each other over huge distances which could lead to the whole breaking the speed of light thing with information if measured!
Hidden variables are ruled out IF locality is preserved. Non-local hidden variables are not ruled out by Bell.
All I understood from comment section is I'm not alone regarding the inability to comprehend to what I just saw in the video.
When Einstein makes a mistake, he's called brilliant, but when my mom and dad make a mistake, they're called parents like wtf.