Quantum Entanglement: An Explanation You've Probably Never Heard (No Math)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 июл 2024
- If you know anything about quantum entanglement, it's probably the phrase, "spooky action at a distance." Today, we sweep aside the drama and explain what is going on as simply and straightforwardly as possible.
Companion blog post: ascientistsfiction.blogspot.c...
Support on Patreon: / intothevortex
Thanks to our patron, Michael Horst
The Audible Affiliate link is expired. Try the Libby app or your local library for free instead.
First video on quantum physics: • Quantum Physics Explai...
Interactive Minkowski diagram: ibises.org.uk/Minkowski.html
#QuantumPhysicsExplained #QuantumEntanglementExplained #ActionAtADistance 
Наука
You delivered on your promise, and I now understand the basic idea of quantum entanglement better than I ever have before - in under 10 minutes!
Give it a few days you'll be confused again like the rest of us.
Clearest explanation I've ever seen on this phenomenon. Kudos!
Agreed. I especially appreciated the idea that particles that interact either collapse or merge their superposition into a combined wave (entanglement). Never got that before. Makes sense.
Why not just admit an electron has a magnetic field or a strong force mechanism that is like a magnetic field and interacts with a magnetic field.. I really don't like the idea of an all pervasive particle field (medium) for each supposed fundamental particle type of the Standard model, superimposed in space...
--
Start with a simple subspace field of +ve cells (ball, quanta, +1) bound by free-flowing -ve charge 'gas' acts as the unifying base matter-energy field and 1 force (Subspace Force) from which the known forces and particles emerge.
--
Knocked free cells and the hole left behind pull the field in and out, trying to balance, overbalancing then repeating forever. Positron-electron pairs. Each also has 6 or more Spin Loops forming a spherical-torus 'Strong Spin Field'.. +ve and -ve Electrostatic Charge is due to charge particles having exactly the same phase in time but opposite phase in space (Positron free cells attracted to gaps between field cells, excess -ve charge gas attracted to surround and/or (partially) fill a field cell or cells..
--
These light speed Electrostatic Force waves repel if in the opposite direction and in phase (same charge), else they form an AC vibrating 'flux tube' between the two particles.. Vibration recoil pushes the 2 particles together along this smooth, attractive path as per Coulombs law, BUT this flux tube can also be stretched to as thin as one field cell wide.. This form of entanglement is an 'instant off' force, like all entanglement mechanism.. When one cell stop vibrating, they all do by the next (Planck) Instant (perhaps taking a few instants to completely rebalance).
--
Spin Loops as 'blipping' cells compress / decompress surounding field laterally, with an entire block of cells moving out then back in at C, AT ONCE, in unison.. This lateral force is (many times) faster than light but no field cell moves faster than light, they just all start moving at (near enough) exavtly the same time... Looping cells spin at C so if multiple cells have to be squezzed together the force is superluminal. This is linked to cell gap / metric spatial tensor (various forms of relativity can work with this model, including 'variable field cell gap size' (variable spatial metic) as a dark energy and gravirty mechanism, but also Einstein's relativity..
--
Light is a transverse wave pattern in the subspace field with compressed, +ve peak and expanded, -ve base, formed by an accelerating charged particle.. The subspace charge force may or may not have a speed and range limit... I would definitely guess yes to range, and probably a speed limit.. Light speed, like spin loop speed is all linked the the speed limit of field cells and -ve charge flow, subspace force is not.
--
Double Slit uses a variation of Pilot Wave theory... A charge particle or photon's highly charged focal point is preceeded by a subspace field warp that splits, difracts and interferes, forming areas of chaos and in-sync calm, fanning out.. This preceding disturbance goes through both slits but the focal point only goes through the slit the gun is pointed at. Preceding disturbance only has to be as large as the slits are wide, but it could be much (MUCH) bigger.. The focal point hits a smooth, calm 'Wave Guide' and follows that path to the screen at the back... Placing another detector in front turns all the subspace field back into chaoitic mess and it goes straight instead.
The explanation is correct at the end, (one wave for many particles), but it is incorrect in the part about quantum fields. The quantum fields are not the wave of the particle, they themselves have a wave to different configurations. The wave-propagation of a particle's amplitude, however, obeys the same equation as the linearlized equation for the field. This confusion is all over videos about quantum fields.
If a wave spans lightyears and collapses everywhere instantly, i certainly call that spooky action at a distance.
As did Einstein
It's the most clear demonstration of the spookiness of the non locality even in the simple wave function of single particle.
That would be spooky action over a great distance
The process that photons use to move from A to B doesn't expend any energy until the photon reaches the target; the photon is emitted, then it is detected, nothing in between.
How is this evidence of a collapsing wave-function?
More like evidence that speed of light travel 'freezes time' for the photon; it radiates no energy while at speed until it suddenly appears at the detector.
Wave-function collapse makes no sense!
Photons are constantly encountering virtual photon/anti-photon pairs.
The original photon is often annihilated by the anti-photon, while its 'information' is adopted by the virtual pair photon!
If photons are playing leap-frog, popping in and out of existence and changing dance partners, wouldn't the wave function have to collapse at each meeting?
@@pirobot668beta no it doesn't make sense but we need to keep trying, for the sake of the 100th monkey.
How is it that this video has only 344 likes?? This is the most clear description I ever heard! Thank you!
Truly amazing explanation, I learned so much from this. I wish actual useful information was as profitable as spooky stories. You deserve all the subs. thank you
This is so well done. I've been reading about this for years and never heard such a clear explanation. Thanks!
This is the first explanation I have ever heard that satisfies my intuition. That makes sense, in other words. And I've heard a lot... this blows me away that it isn't explained like this more often. It is so simple! Especially what you emphasized at the end, that there is no causation, no action at a distance at all in the first place, and that's all from our flawed way of thinking about it. Damn, thank you very much.
Instantly subscribed! What a clear and intuitive explanation, super impressive. Thanks!
This is the best explanation for quantum entanglement I have heard and takes me closer to understanding it. Many thanks!
Thanks for being the first one to explain entanglment to me in a way that verfies how I always thought it would work. They were set to be opposite whenever get measured= no spook needed.
Well done. But you haven't explained away the spookyness at all.
👍 Let’s repeat Will Smith: Best of the best of..
Why not? It is a measurement of two “points” on a single wave. What is spooky?
@@scienceexplains302 "Good" answer. Much like this Captain America answering "Best of the best of the best" in MIB
@@scienceexplains302 the spookiness lies in the contradiction between the apparent separateness of the particles and unity of the wave over large distances. If you blow a soap bubble, it doesn't pop in a nonlocal fashion all at once because it isn't a single discrete entity. The pop spreads out in a ring because it is made of countless particles in chemical bond with one another, and the water tension holding them together breaks in a cascade at some finite speed (I assume it's the speed of sound through the bubble but the point is that it's not "infinitely" fast).
So, when special relativity tells us that the only way two objects can be correlated over some distance of space is by some kind of carrier that can travel no faster than light in a vacuum, naively we would expect that a wave across space would "pop" similar to a bubble, with the ripple traveling at light speed. QM bypasses this by telling us that the separateness (in terms of either distance or identity, take your pick) of the particles is an illusion. All you explanation does is push the question back to the measurement problem: why does an entangled wave function have this weird nonlocal behavior, and why does a "measurement" collapse the wave function into more intuitive classical behavior?
TL;DR - QM is spooky because no matter how you slice it, something we assume is fundamental must actually be an illusion. Physical space, the arrow of time, the notion of causality, identity... how could that not feel weirdly conspiratorial?
@@timhaldane7588 I don’t see conspiracies as easily
I understood that when the wave interacts with anything else (e.g. via a measurement), the information is determined in our world (I am allowing for the possibility of the Many Worlds Interpretation).
Since it is all one wave, whatever the wave’s characteristic is at one end, it has to have the same at the other within our world. It is a collapse of logic, too.
Your videos on this channel are somehow like, I have low motivation to watch them, but every single time I do, it's something really interesting and well done
Don't feel obligated! I don't expect there's much overlap in my two channels' audiences.
@@chrishorst2124 Instantaneous nearfield electromagnetic fields are real and have been demonstrated both theoretically using Maxwell equations and experimentally. We present a paper below that shows that information in these fields propagate instantaneously. See links below for more information. This phenomena can also be explained using using the Pilot Wave interpretation quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP).
In this interpretation HUP is: Δx Δp = h, where Δx and Δp correspond to average values. So in HUP: Δx Δp = h, where Δp=mΔv, thus HUP becomes: Δx Δv = h/m, where m is an effective mass due to momentum. In the nearfield, where the field is created, Δx=0, therefore Δv=infinity.
In the farfield, HUP: Δx Δp = h, where p = h/λ. HUP then becomes: Δx h/λ = h, or Δx=λ. Also in the farfield HUP becomes: λmΔv=h, thus Δv=h/(mλ). Since p=h/λ, then Δv=p/m. Also since p=mc, then Δv=c.
So in summary, in the nearfield Δv=infinity, and in the farfield Δv=c, where Δv is the average velocity of the photon according to Pilot Wave theory. But according to the Copenhagen interpretation, the above argument does not make sense, since Δv corresponds to uncertainties in their values.
In addition to the Pilot Wave interpretation, only the Ensemble Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics also interprets the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP) in terms of averages. But the Ensemble Interpretation does not support instantaneous propagation of information, whereas Pilot Wave theory does. Therefore, other than Pilot Wave theory, no other interpretation of Quantum Mechanics supports instantaneous propagation of information as demonstrated in our experiment, and interprets the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in terms of averages.
*Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper showing information propagates instantaneously:
www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1
*RUclips presentation of above arguments:
ruclips.net/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/видео.html
*More extensive paper for the above arguments:
William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023:
vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
Dr. William Walker - PhD Physics, ETH Zurich, 1997
Great video, well done. This is the first time I have seen an explanation of this phenomenon in this way. I was thinking about the possibility that two entangled particles are actually one and the same system or object. This video helped me a lot.
Been thinking so too. The wave is the object
@@alansaunders1828 Yea and that is crazy. Just think about that, quantum waves are POSSIBILITY WAVES, that sounds like a mathematical concept, but quantum physics show us that this wave can be material, real. For example, double slit experiment is prove that possibility wave Is something real...particles in superpostion realy exist until we look at them. Thats how I understand quantum waves.
You explained it exactly how I envisioned it prior to viewing. Thank you for confirming my understanding of entanglement.
The only issue I have is that the wave itself seems to be immune to the universal speed limit upon collapse.
I perused you video list and your content is absolutely mind blowing, right up my alley. I subscribed, can’t believe I did not see your channel before as I always look for new scientific content.
You're right that the wave itself "seems" to break the universal speed limit but that come from already knowing how the particles were correlated, if the particles are entangled but you don't know whether oppositely or the same spin, you don't actually communicate anything faster than lightspeed.
Not to mention you can say that the wave collapses at lightspeed if you want, there is no physical difference as far as I've heard/seen
Substitute "look at" for "collapse" and it's no more difficult to understand than putting heads and tails, or black & white, or plus & minus etc. etc. In sealed envelopes. Because regardless of them being waves, that's all they effectively are - opposite each other, and yet to be observed by someone to see which half they had..
I agree with your question, it's still 2 particles communicating (across a wave) instantly. explain that?
@@AllenProxmire not communicating right. just destined opposites
Many years ago, this was explained as either faster than light communication, or a unified whole. Since we can't test this theory outside of our local region, namely earth, I think it's a leap to believe that this will work light years away. Perhaps all matter and energies in our locality are just in balance.
Although, that brings up a good point, it's still technically faster than light communication. It will still provide near-instant speeds of traffic on the internet. Unfortunately, it sounds like it wouldn't be very useful between two points in space unless we were to find out how to entangle particles remotely. Then, if that happens, we could find out if there actually is just a local phenomenon
The hidden variables for each direction could be re-randomized each time a measurement is done, it's a little odd but I still think that's a better explanation. Either way the Stern-Gerlatch experiment doesn't seem to prove anything, unless there is more to it that you left out to keep it brief.
Anyway, great explanation, you've earned a sub.
This video aims to describe what happens at a phenomenological level (that which we can see and measure). We'll get to interpretations another time!
Great explanation 👌. Keep up the great work!
The immediate collapse of the wave function still seems a little spooky to me, but talking about it as a single wave does a lot more sense. This explanation is more satisfying than what I got in Intro to Modern Physics.
Excellent. I now understand quantum physics a bit more. :-) Never had these topics explained this understandably.
The best video I've seen about Q.Entanglement. Thank you so much!
All systems of particles must be represented by one wavefunction for each system. This is NOT limited to entangled particles. Otherwise, the Bose-Einstein vs. Fermi-Dirac statistics are all wrong as are the symmetries of the respective wavefunctions. To estimate many-particle system wavefunctions, we usually must assume specific, limited, intrasystem interactions so that we can separate the wavefunctions into a sum of products having the correct symmetry and statistics. Typically, this strategy yields the gross properties we observe and provides the backbone for perturbation theory to fill in gaps that we also observe. This is true for atomic, molecular, and extended crystalline solid systems.
That is correct.
Superb!
With that one sentence, ‘spooky’ collapses.
Though I’m not sure if I’m relieved or disappointed 😉
Really great explanation, best yet.
My subscription is well-deserved. Great video.
This is the best explanation I've heard - thank you
Ever since I was a young teenager, I would always tell people that everything I am thinking and every bit of information I collect is from an instantaneous exchange of quantum particles and it is infinitely microscopic and infinitely stellar. We are at an illusory distance...
Great content homie!
Great stuff! Enjoyed a presentation that wasn't pretentious or patronizing!
THANK YOU for not going on and on about how "weird" these concepts are!
Maybe they are, but it's hardly the point.
Trying to reframe these concepts in ways that we can reason with them is my goal anyways.
Things like what it means to be "local" for example, puts some question on the idea of distance, and how quantum fields apparently disregard them. At least in the way that we are used to conceptualizing them.
I appreciate your efforts very much.
finally... i was asking in many forums and channels about this but your explanation finally gave me a clue! The part where said "they are not signaling each other" made me understand, that the particles are actually connected through this so called "wave".... nice nice
Nice vid, you're in my subscribed list next to PBS spacetime and Science Asylum. I bet you'll grow big soon.
Suggestion for a never-answered-question I had : if entanglement is instantaneous, what about time dilation ? If you measure at the same moment the particle A on earth while particle B is moving at the speed of light in a spaceship ... will there be a delay (will Bell's inequality be verified) ?
The answer is that when exactly the wave function collapses is relative! If in one reference frame A is measured before B, and in another B is measured before A, then the question of which measurement collapses the wave function does not have an objective answer! Both are true from their respective points of view.
@@chrishorst2124
Thanks for the quick answer ! That's very interesting, in my mind instantness implies some kind of "universal time". But I bet it's more awkward than that :)
@@En_theo read Carlo Rovelli's book The Order of Time....
@@kingsandassociates7176
Ah yes thanks for the tip, I have seen several videos of him. Sounded very interesting.
Nice video! Subscribed!
Amazing! Thanks
That was sooo clearly explained! And I am a fellow QM physicist.
Very good explanation but it seems you can only shift the spookiness from one element of the explanation to another, you can't eliminate it.
Excellent summary!
Best explanation if have heard so far, though it still boggle my mind.
Thank you for the explanation love it and enjoy it
A good a explanation of how entanglement happens. The more difficult challenge is to explain how and why these things occur. Result in far more satisfying answers.
Finally. Well explained. Thanks.
Wow! That was amazing! Thank you! New favorite channel! You've given me an idea. Hope it doesn't sound crazy
I'm thinking about John Wheeler's One Electron, and mass gain as energy is added at luminal speed. intuitively it makes sense that if all electrons were local manifestations of one object (the electron field), that exists in a kind of hyperspace knot that loops throughout our spacetime, that adding energy would be like pushing on a string. The energy of pushing forces the string against itself leading to clumping. Perhaps a similar effect happens in cyclotrons?
I think it could also help explain entanglement. If it's all one object then we might think of it as a single loop arranged in a kind of spaghetti form, and being entangled is just part of this pervasive knot. Entanglement might occur at intersections in the knot, causing the field to carry two different bits of information.
Imagine if you had a length of rope with chevrons on it to determine an arbitrary direction. Mess the rope up and then grab two pieces and bring them next to each other. The directions will be random, but it's still the same rope. And by untangling those two pieces you've changed the state it was in before.
I'd love to hear your thoughts, and thank you again for this clear explanation, and the truth-telling about science communication and funding. Now I know how I'm going to spend my day off - I'll be watching your videos!
Thanks for the compliments! Let's see if I can interpret your idea.
The idea of a single linear electron was never meant to be taken seriously, even by Wheeler. He suggested the idea as a joke regarding how anti-electrons are sometimes modeled as electrons going backward in time for the sake of particle interaction calculations.
However, the idea of electrons (and positrons) being all the same thing is not strictly incorrect, as they are all excitations in the same field, the electron field, which exists everywhere. Sometimes two excitations of the wave get their information mixed together; two particles-worth of information that can't be separated until they are measured (i.e. interact with the outside world, doesn't have to be in an experiment). That's entanglement.
Your thoughts about electrons being represented by a rope that is tangled up throughout space-time is somewhat similar conceptually, so yeah, I guess it's valid to think about it that way.
@@chrishorst2124 Yes, you have it right. I know it originally wasn't meant to be taken seriously, but as you say it's not technically incorrect. The only way it would work is if the electron field existed in any number of heretofore undiscovered dimensions.
Hypothetically, it could be used for ftl communication the way the far end of the rug moves along with the end you're pulling. It's not violating the c speed limit, it's just connected outside spacetime. And yet, it wouldn't lead to paradoxes because both observer's clocks tick forward thanks to entropy (even if at different relative rates). The information couldn't be changed as it's already happened. It's as if entropy itself is a singularity.
A proposed communication system could operate by finding a way to (so to speak) drag the field back and forth, causing an instantaneous change elsewhere.
It wouldn't allow for full duplex, though, unless there was someone pulling back in sync on the other end.
Anyway, thanks for engaging and keep up the good work! Looking forward to more content
@@jillianonthehudson1739 Unfortunately, changes in a field don't affect the far ends instantaneously; the changes have to propagate at the speed of light or slower.
Neat video thanks
You earned a new subscriber with this one.
For this explanation to be correct though you have to forfeit locality, which is something that many physicists will not accept. For me, this is also the most logical explanation too, but if it was true it would be for sure a "spooky action at a distance" since the wave collapse happens instantaneous but we actually have no idea how this happens (spooky) and does affect the two particles which are far away (action at a distance)
yeah, it's too easy to say "the wave function collapses instantaneously"...but why and how? It's like the wave function can propagate in another dimension where 3D distances are irrelevant?
@@kalinkaata yes exaclty, that's what you are implying with the video's explanation or the pilot-wave theory. Not something as obvious though as this videos want to present, but for me is more sensible that the others more crazy interpretations.
@@kalinkaata @Dimitris P
but the wavefunction has already propagated before "collapse" (I mean the pair is already separated).
I do imagine (based on Sean Carol`s videos) that Q systems can get "separated" from the rest of the universe enough to be "not in space": spatial distances are not meaningful without exchange of information... Spatial arrangements are information about the inter-relations of Quantum systems (be it an elementary particle or atoms, or molecules and so on). Nothing is spatial in itself, but only relative to others. Otherwise the double slit experiment wouldn't work with molecules...
But I'm a biologist so maybe I got it wrong at all
Basically I imagine the breakdown of entanglement as a "disconnection" of two "waves": some internal "information" must connect the parts of the entangled system. The superposition is like tossed coin, but the Quantum properties are not spatial in itself, only their manifestations at interactions. Entanglement synchronizes/coordinates the properties between constituents, and this doesn't involve exchange of energy. Only internal "information" is shared.
If you ask me what that is, I turn that question back: what is energy?
When "collapse" happen - this information bond is broken (why should it have a temporal aspect to it? We can talk about time because
of energy conservation...and this phenomenon doesn't involve change in energy).
Maybe I just speculate too much. Don't take me too seriously 😀
@@Littleprinceleon Wouldn't "disconnection" and "collapse" involve propagation ? How can something collapse without propagation? I somewhat agree that the wave function must reside out of our space, but the only way I can imagine is if it exists in another dimension(s).Maybe string theory is right about requiring 11dimensions.
Good explanation. Thanks.
Fantastic insight. Two particles one wave function. I may have heard this before -but the way you explained it, it really resonated. Thank you. Subscribed.
Very good and clear video. I want to ask a thing: when you measure the entangled wave you know that the particles are the opposite but than they are not correlated anymore, so that means that after the measurement (and the wave collapses) there are 2 separated wave/particles?
I believe we could not get communication faster than light, because the distance we need to get between two particles would always imply that particles would interact with other particles, meaning that it would disentangle from the first one. Actually, when we see electrons in a wire at ambient temperatures, they're always entangling and disentangling while being conducted; unless they're cold, meaning that stabilized Cooper pairs would be more energetic favourable. Entangling and disentangling means a lowering on potential energy at high mean energy
Excellent, thanks!
Very good explanation.
Great. subscribed.
Excellent . The spooky part still is that something that happens here can affect the measurement of something light years away. Yes - we can just say information doesn’t have to travel along the wave - but just saying that doesn’t make it any less weird : somehow the fact that I did something at point x is affecting point b.
Perhaps space time collapses in a higher dimension and the two particles are actually close to each other - we just don’t see it that way because of our limited perspective . I’m not saying that’s how it works but we need some way of explaining this ‘effect’ (if not ‘action’ hat a distance
A more plausible theory, in my mind, is simply that our 4 dimensional reality exists within a larger dimensional reality of wave like superpositions, with us simply being unable to observe the wave because it is part of a larger 5 dimensional reality that our 4 dimensional reality is just a slice of. When we interact with the wave we can only do so with a 4 dimensional slice of it. So it appears to collapse into a particle but what is really happening is that we are just bringing a 4 dimensional slice of it into our observable reality.
So if we observe an entangled particle with an up spin then we know that the other will be down when it's measured not because that information is travelling faster than light but simply because we know, at that moment, that we are in the reality where the entangled particle that we measure is up, so we know the other will be down. Just as if we observe it down, we know we are in the reality where the other will be up, because we know they are opposite based on the already established observations of quantum entanglement. So the superpositions of particles is simply the multiverse of 4 dimensional realities that make a 5 dimensional reality of wave like superpositions, within which all waves exist as waves, with those waves made up of countless slices of 4 dimensional realities that we experience.
Obviously this is just conjecture but it does fit the data.
@@matthewsands1572 I don't believe there needs to be any 5th dimension talk. the particles have to get close and entangled before they are sent apart, as soon as they are entangled they are destined to be opposites whenever they are observed
@@DemocratsReadMyBio That doesn't explain superpositions, waves appearing to collapse into particles when observed, it doesn't explain the delayed choice experiment or the double slit, where as the theory I laid out does.
How you laid it out is just the same as saying I put a red sock in one of two boxes and then sent the boxes lightyears apart. Of course, if I open one and find no sock I know that the other box contains the sock, I instantly know this about the other box. But the idea of superpositions is that until one of the boxes is opened the sock is in both boxes and will only settle on one or the other when you observe inside one of them. Rather than faster than light speed communication it could just be that once you "collapse" a wave to a particle through observation/interaction what is actually happening is that you are selecting the 4D slice, that is your reality, of the larger 5D reality that contains all potential reality. So, essentially, until we observe it everything is a probability wave in this superstate. When we observe it we don't change the 5d reality, we just select our 4d slice of it that is our observable universer/reality.
great video ❤
Need to hear more about how this "COLLAPSE" thing works, since it apparently occurs "everywhere simultaneously" without reference the two particle's respective light-cones. IE, the wave function will never colllapse in two places at once ...
It's worse than that. The wave function collapses throughout all of time too. The way I think of it is consistency > causality.
How does it work? That's where the interpretations come in. It could be that the wave function never collapses, but more and more particles become entangled in superposition, until we the observers go into superposition. Because superimposed observers can perceive only things that are consistent with their partial state, the two states of observers will be unaware of each other, and the universe will have effectively split in two timelines. This is the Many-Worlds interpretation.
There is also the Objective Collapse interpretation, which states that there is only one timeline, and all other possibilities stop being possible when the wave function collapses. What causes this to happen? Probability.
There is also the Hidden Variables interpretation, which says there are more properties which we currently cannot measure, or perhaps which are impossible to measure, which drive quantum mechanics from a deeper level.
There are others, but those are the big ones.
Discussions on QM so often make a big deal out of the two slit experiment. I say we need to think more about the one slit experiment. Imagine a screen with one pinhole and a hemi-spherical screen covered with light sensors centered about that pinhole. A dim light source, one photon at a time, shines on the pinhole from the other side. That photon diffracts and lands somewhere on the screen firing one light sensor or making one dot on film. How do all the other sensors or the rest of the film "know" not to absorb the photon? Bohm's way of looking at it, based on deBroglie's Theory of the Double Solution, seems to explain things but doesn't explain anything else very well.
There is no photon, there is only the electromagnetic field (... rather the EM's unification with the other quantum feilds). Wht we call a photon is a useful abstraction about certain kinds of events (which are themselves abstractions from flow). I think maybe we should spend more time thinking about events as a unitary thingy with a time dimension, satisfying all sorts of constraints. Watch the hole, not the doughnut.Personally.@@DrunkenUFOPilot
@@chrishorst2124 There is no such thing as collapse. You won't even find a proper definition of the term in the textbooks. It's simply a misunderstanding of the physics that underlies quantum mechanics. There are also no superimposed observers. That's just plain intellectual nonsense that arrives out of desperate attempts to rescue some form of classical physics. All of this can be trivially explained with Kolmogorov and statistically independent ensemble observations.
A Question - if a wave function collapses as soon as a particular characteristic is measured, how can one be certain that the entangled electron (1 wave function, 2 particles) is of the opposite persuasion since the wave function collapsed and both particles have started a new wave function? If it is a mathematical equation that tells us this, that is fine, but there is no way to actually test for this. One would have to know exactly which particles were entangled and it is (I am supposing) impossible to measure both simultaneously. This is much like the Double Slit photon experiment. All I get from the Bell Double slit experiment is that photons act as both waves and particles and that the wave function seems to be able to pass thru the slits without a problem. I am certain I am not grasping something correctly.
Here I was hoping for some new ideas that explains this stuff... It doesn't make sense that a wave collapses. Unless we really are living in a simulation, there must be some process to explain the collapse. With other words, there must be some "physics".
Also, what kind of wave can encode the difference between spin "up+down" and "down+up"?
A wave with one high and one low maybe?
What are practical applications of this knowledge; and how would these applications be realised sinces all on such small scales? Cheers, i really am going to study your channel. (Like i've done with the great David Butler)
Excellent video! Question: S'pose you have two entangled electrons and one of them gets observed. Is it not true, since they both share the same wave function, then both electrons get 'realized' once the first one is observed?
No. The other particle is still in superposition. We just know what what its state will become when it collapses.
Also, I wouldn't use the word, "realized." When a particle is in superposition it still exists, it's state is just in a superposition. In fact, because of the Uncertainty Principle, no particle is ever not in some kind of superposition.
I've known there must have been a ruse here. Entaglment communication never sounded natural to me, however, I thouth it was some measurment imperfection. Now I can see it's about misconception. Thank you so much for this video!
Then explain the quantum eraser experiment. Most deny that an effect is transferred faster than the speed of light but there is really no other way of explaining it.
If you are looking for a mechanism by which nature enforces entanglement, then there are about half a dozen possibilities. Given we have no means of measuring any underlying "sub-quantum" mechanism, there is no way to say meaningfully how nature achieves this. QM, explicitly, only deals with what is measurable.
@@RAFAELSILVA-by6dy Regardless of the underlying mechanism, the fact still remains that an effect has been transmitted faster than the speed of light. The setup of the quantum eraser experiment shows that a message can be sent (at least over a short distance) faster than the speed of light.
I think that Einstein would say that the entanglement was just a pre-determined thing. Nothing to see here folks, move along. I THINK that is what Einstein would say. Neils Bohr thought otherwise. I’m still wigged out by the idea of a wave function somehow finding a way to be separated by light years of distance. How does that happen? Of course, then there is the idea that maybe there is only one electron that is not bound by time and that every electron we find is really one and the same electron. Lots of ideas, not as much certainty.
@@KaliferDeil If you think that, you haven't understood the relationship between QM and relativity. There's no necessity for information to be transmitted between the particles. Non-locality is not the same as faster-than-light messaging. It's not the only way to achieve non-locality.
Here are four options (your "only" option is number 3):
They are:
1. Multiple Worlds
2. Acausal. There is simply no dynamic account of what occurs.
3. Nonlocal interaction, i.e. FTL and ultimately ately this would mean Relativity is wrong
4. Spacetime is highly topologically nontrivial, e.g. there are microscopic wormholes everywhere.
just tell me if roger's conformal universe reinvents itself over and over without the annihilated antimatter component of similar sum each time, and where the extra matter comes from added in if its half gone each time?
hi. i get the idea that you also have a thirst for learning and progress. my issue is that i see the idea of sanctifying knowledge into a refined info exchange as a retro step that stops more people learning easily without bending to a new language. which is why i value your explanations.
How is entanglement used 'repeatedly' in Quantum computers?
Do they entangle particles again after every measurement?
I think entangling particles is part of the computation process, but to be honest I don't know much about quantum computing.
Doesn't the dominate force have causality during the interaction? Causing reduction or reinforcement depending upon the amount of vibration in the fields and their directions of polarity? A ping effect like sonar? Or, a reinforcement of direction if the spin is in sync with the existing force wave giving aplification? Giving more charge direction? The pendulum effect of synchronization?
Great explanation
One of my 10^7 questions is: what constitutes a measurement? I've read about variations on the 2-slit experiment with, say, electrons.
1) no "measurement" as to which slit was traversed: 100% wave like interference.
2) "perfect" determination of which slit, including closing one, no wave like interference.
One idea in what I read was to determine the slit by shining a light to determine which slit. As the light get brighter, the determination gets more accurate and the interference pattern disappears. In between, the more accurate the measurement, the more "particle-like" the electron becomes.
Back to the what is a measurement question. Don't the slits themselves "know" if the particle passed through it? More precisely, the non-slit part of the slit, i.e. the sides. If the electron goes through the right slit, then everything in the universe closer to the right slit knows it. Charged particles will experience more electrical force, everything will experience time dilation because they are closer to the massive electron being closer. They will experience a greater force of gravity, the particles making up the right slit will "recoil" due to the interaction with the particle, although I think this is the same as the electrical and gravitational interactions. It seems like everything in the universe will be affected differently depending on the slit just because they are a non-zero distance apart.
This is based on my one entire year of physics in 1980. So it's probably almost, but quite, entirely wrong.
And just to be really off base.
It is said we know nothing about a particle before it is measured. Yet you say we do know that it is both.
So two absurdities follow: 1) How do we know we know nothing? 2) Knowing, say, spin is both up and down means we know something.
I guess there are very specific definitions of "know" and "nothing" and "we" and "anything" in these cases.
If I can possibly make this any more confusing or further from reality, let me know. I'm sure I can make it both better AND worse until you read the changes.
Plus, I'm too tired to even proff raed it. Never mind the punctuation.
Such curiosity! I'll do my best to answer your questions.
A measurement is an action which carries information about the particle to the rest of the world. This does not count for effects smaller than the limits of the uncertainty principle, like the effect of the electron on the material around the slits.
As for knowledge, we science communicators have a bad habit of dumbing ideas down. When we do this, important information is lost, and irrelevant (or even wrong) information is added. Saying "we know nothing about the particle before it is measured" is dumbing it down. We do know something about the particle: its wave state. From that, we can calculate the probabilities of the results of measuring its observable properties, like position, energy, and spin.
@@chrishorst2124 Thank you so much. One simple sentence: This does not count for effects smaller than the limits of the uncertainty principle, like the effect of the electron on the material around the slits.
Makes it so much clearer. It was like when I saw a vid on how it the time part of curved spacetime makes thing fall. The rubber sheet analogy has so many problems, especially the fact it that needs gravity to explain gravity.
Dumbing down is easy. Simplifying is very, very hard.
I appreciate the hard work you're doing for us. Theodore Sturgeon said 90% of everything is crap. Due to deflation in education, 99.9% of the internet is crap. However, that 0.1% is still very big, and seriously non-crappy.
Since we already start with QFT, you can also start with the far simpler version: the loader theory (Planck and others). It also can be showed with simple laboratory experiments. See www.thresholdmodel.com
The main idea is that the quantization occurs at the detector and not all the time.
A wave arriving at 10 resonating detectors and will increase the energy value at each detector. When it reaches a threshold, the state of the detector changes and a "quantum particle" has been detected. The detectors start randomized and sometimes they will find 2 or more particles. Also works for alpha particles in the experiments. More wave energy means more chance of double detection at the same time.
And this is exactly what the experiments show.
This is far simpler and the better solution according to Occams Razor.
And I wished that more people would consider this alternative. Or at least know about it.
No virtual particles no pilot waves no hidden dimensions no parallel worlds etc. It is possible.
Note: QED has some fundamental problems and I dont think they were solved with QFT. The mathematics does not really work. And the high accuracy was hyped and later turned out to be false. It is a different topic, but it made me look for alternatives that do work and can be shown in experiments.
Why can’t once the spin is measured at one end allow that person to communicate it by changing the spin of an additional separate pair of electrons...it would only require the time to measure and react...?
@5:45 Problem is the definition of the "same" time. The observers, far away located, need to know whether they are measuring at the same time. How do they achieve this? If they set clocks and move away from each other time gets shifted by relativity!
Doesn't have to be measured at the same time. In fact, according to special relativity, any two events that are at the same time in one reference frame are at different times in another. Thus, if entangled particles A and B are measured outside of each other's light cones, then in some reference frames A is measured first and in other reference frames B is measured first. More evidence in my view that entanglement can't send information; physics doesn't distinguish between the sender and the receiver.
One more question please 🙏
At 7 mins in- On the two entangled particles...
"When you measure the spin of your electron, that wave collapses, setting in stone that *when the second electron spin is measured* its spin will collapse to the opposite value"
If they are 1 wave two particles, why doesn't the second electron collapse the same instant that the first is measured...? Are you saying it continues to act as a wave until its spin is measured also? Why doesn't the whole two-particle wave collapse? Is that because it has a full quanta of energy so can continue in wave form?
Excellent!
Explained very well however how come both particles have same energy all times weather together or separated and how come they have wave property where all waves have again same energy output or there something else
They don't have the same energy at all times. Only the specific properties that are entangled are correlated.
Thanks for this articulate and concise explanation. Isn't the correlation or entanglement explainable via the left glove and right glove analogy, If one person has the left then at that point he will know that the other person has the right regardless of time/space. Also you reference another video that discusses what constitutes an observer/measurement, did you make that one in the end? Thanks again.
Yes I did! Here's the link: ruclips.net/video/QxFjVyioRCA/видео.html
Entanglement correlation is kind of like the gloves analogy, except the gloves have already determined which one is left and which is right before you look. Elementary particles are actually really in superposition.
So if an entangled and unmeasured particle has both spins up and down, while a measured one has only one of those, can't we just measure whether the overall magnetic field of an electron is zero (meaning still entangled) or not (meaning already measured)? Of course, the measurement has to be of such kind to just determine the intensity, but not the direction of the magnetic field, to avoid collapsing the wave function.
As a non Physicist I have always struggled with the physicist's use of the word "Particle". To a non physicist like me "particle" implies a hard small object that endures. Your presentation left me thinking that maybe "Particles" do not endure. What endures is the wave. "Particles" only happen for a brief time. For example when the photon hits the screen behind the double slit experiment.
That's how most people think of particles, and it makes sense if we're thinking of particles of dust or mist or confetti. But when we get down to the level of electrons and photons, there just isn't anything in our everyday experience that's a perfect analogy.
"The totat amplitude added up over the whole wave cannot be less than one particle's worth." Is the "whole amplitude over the whole wave" the length of the wave x the average amplitude over the entire length?
That's about right. If we want to get mathematical, it's the integral of the amplitude squared over the space the wave occupies.
Best explanation for the rest of us!
Very sad we cant find the way to harness entaglemten to transmit information.... 😢
I will speculate (in my ignorance) what would happen if you entangle 2 time cristals sets.. ? And change the properties of 1 set (via lasser) to alter the 2 one?...its that possible?
If you change the properties of one end of an entangled pair, it doesn't change the other end, it breaks the entanglement.
I would only suggest that we say quantum entanglement is: multiple particles, one ripple. A water ripple is a good analogue, but it's probably more like a spherical ripple of radius r = speed of light * time.
I already understood quantum entanglement, but you did a nice job of explaining it.
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics" Richard Feynman
@@vincentv.9729 That's decades old. We understand QM quite well. What is still up for grabs is the interpretation of wave-particle duality. Copenhagen, Many Worlds, Boehm, etc.
Decades old, but still correct.
How many degrees for the 2nd magnet are needed to reset the entenglement? 42?
I wrote an article on why this happens a few years ago
vixra.org/pdf/1508.0011v1.pdf
The conclusion at the end is:
"It's not the particle that reveals its spin, but the measuring system (the universe) that aligns itself to that spin"
The special property of entangled particles is not only that they are entangled with each other, but are disconnected from the rest of the universe until they are measured.
So it's more plausible for an entire universe to adapt to an independent small system? Hmm
@@Littleprinceleon Actually, yes!
They don't "adapt" but match each other.
If there is conservation of angular momentum then there is no teleportation. Hence the electron doesn't teleport to your observation and instead fills the entire wave function.
Brilliant !
This makes sense. One thing that bothers me about physicists' talk about this stuff is they often start talking about their descripts and reality as if they were the same thing. Wave functions are descriptions, "wave function collapse" is a mathematical operation not a physical event. Mathematics is very useful for describing reality but it isn't reality. That's why we choose the mathematics that bests fits reality instead of choosing a reality that best fits mathematics.
Non-locality makes sense to me, point like particles don't. The problem with point like particles as descriptions is on their own they can't be used to describe interactions or to create anything that is extended in space. That is because to interact they would have to be at the same place and two infinitesimally small things would never be at the same place. So something has to be spread out. Particles are an illusion ;-)
How can you ensure that both measurenents were taken in the same time?
This non locality also applies to time as well, right? So when the wave collapses in a delayed quantum eraser experiment, this is showing the field the wave collapsed in exists in all points in time simultaneously?
Yes.
@@chrishorst2124 So how do you like to interpret this? That space and time are an illusion to beings that experience "locality" in space and time, or that fields simply transcend them and are thus space-time agnostic?
@@ezdeezytube Probably the latter.
The main troubling part seems an obvious one, that is not addressed here or anywhere I can remember. How can two particles a long distance apart--a light year, as you suggest?--possibly be measured or observed at the same time. Even on opposite sides of the earth?
Second "curious part," which may be due to the analogy shown, i.e. a particle dropping into water, why is the "wave" not seen a vortex, as it actually is in water?
Answer(s) from anyone appreciated in advance. Thanks!
Thanks for the recommend algo
I like that you did not attempt to sensationalize the concept. QM is by no means simple but it does not have to be presented as "magic".
I have been defending this theory in my tertulia. Nice explanation
Act-uality is holographic, "Particles" are Spinfoam bubble-modes of time-timing sync-duration, and Entanglement is a standing wave frequency condensation, so "light years away" is a reciprocal connection to do with Sync-duration, just like Particle half-life and BBT half-truth.
The Loop Quantum Operator Logic of "Gravity" is actually related to the Chain Rule in Calculus, and the transverse trancendental e-Pi continuous creation constant condensation connection in i-reflection probability density-intensity Singularity positioning integration containment. This is merely the reciprocal connection of Math-Physics wave length/frequency relationship of Infinity/Eternity here-now-forever. Superspin is another identifier of "turning together", ie Universe which is the reciprocal connection equivalent of one message or the Holographic Principle, or Modulation Mechanism Imagery in Singularity.., and so on.
Entanglement is mostly 2-ness i-reflection containment sight plane Perspective to our senses, ie Left-Right, Up-Down, inside-outside etc of coherence-cohesion Bose-Einsteinian type Condensates-objectives.
First Principle Observation approach. Fun to imagine Sciencing Re-search practice.
Thanks for the straightforward explanation. I wonder how it's used in quantum computing. Is it just mirroring processes?
In quantum computing, every particle is a qubit, which can be in a superposition of 0 and 1. If a bunch of qubits are entangled, you can run a few specific algorithms which put the data in a superposition of all possible answers and ensure that only the correct answer is displayed. I've had it explained to me, but I'd have to brush up on it to explain it myself.
@@chrishorst2124 Thanks! Sounds unfathomable but fascinating.
Would this also be what happens with electron quantum orbital jumps? Also, is it true that the probability wave collapses instantaneously or faster than light speed? Is this allowed because nothing is actually traveling?
It's not correct to say the probability wave collapsed at any speed or instantaneously. What we mean when we say it collapses is that you won't get contradictory measurements, no matter how far away you take them.
Can you ask your other questions again? For some reason RUclips isn't giving me a "read more" option on your comment.
@@chrishorst2124, thanks, that was all my questions I think. Do you have a video on the reality of probability waves? I know this is a complicated and unclear subject, but it’d be nice to see some ideas like pilot wave theory, etc.
@@randalljsilva I have a video on interpretations of quantum physics, if that's what you're looking for.
@@chrishorst2124 thanks I’ll have a look. Sorry I keep asking questions but I should have started out by complimenting your ability to articulate these complex ideas in ways desperate people like me without physics backgrounds can start to understand. :-)
Can you entangle 3 particles? If so, when you measure one, what do you know about the other 2?
Yes you can. When you measure one of them, you know the state of the other two, which may or may not still be entangled, depending on how the three were initially set up.
A very, well almost intuitive explanation of entanglement.
Excellent
What spin does the 3rd electron get if 3 electrons are entangled and you measure one of them?
It depends on the total state. In the example I give in the video, it is an |up down> + |down up> entanglement. Two electrons can also be in an |up up> + |down down> state if they are entangled by a different process, and I think there might be even more involving minus signs if I remember. So if you have 3 electrons, they could be in |up up up> + |down down down>, |up down up> + |down up down>, or any combination you can make.
If a photon is a particle it is a spherical particle which increases in radius at c from emission point and has a membrane thickness of its wavelength. We never interact with the entire photon. We break the wave function of the membrane and the entirety of the energy becomes concentrated at that point of absorption by an atom.
Photons need a resonant chamber to rest in.
You can’t burst half a balloon nor can you half burst a balloon.
Does not make sense. 1 wave with two particles half a light year apart. When you measure one the entire wave collapses. But that wave collapse is instantaneous cause and effect at faster than light speed. Just because its a single wave doesn't explain how the collapse occurs across its entirety at faster than light speed. Would love to understand this but this did not help sorry. What am I missing?
You are not missing anything. There is no explanation that leaves everybody satisfied. In this explanation you have to sacrifice locality, so you have to accept that faster than light or instantaneous collapse happen in the underlying wave which affects the particles. Of course there is no way of faster than light communication with that as there is no way you can control it, but you have to accept that it does happen instantaneous and thus non-locally. In the Copenhagen interpretation you have to sacrifice determinism for example, for retro-causality interpretations you have to sacrifice causality and in the many-worlds interpretation you have to sacrifice realism. Based on experiments, there is no interpretation that fits perfectly and logically in the framework of modern physics.
@@jimipet thank you that does help!
@@jonwebb2417 When a wave function collapses there is no causality, only correlation. Although, I may be the only person in the world who is comfortable with that explanation.
Firstly, explain me: what is distance? What is space, what's time and what's space-time? Do you think we can get synchronized clocks independent of "the speed of light"? When you get a hunch of what is expressed by the "speed of light", and you'll start to question your perception of space. Unfortunately due to our human view point it's almost impossible for a non- mathematician (eg to me, as a biologist) to bypass the notion of independently existing time. Maybe the video "We all move at the speed of light" might help kick on the path of relativity.
great video
How is that different from left-hand and right-hand gloves in a box?
Gloves are either left-hand or right-hand before you open the box. Particles in superposition are both at once until the box is opened.
what happens if we add magnetic field to one of the entangled electron to manipulate it state? Shouldn't other one respond with opposite result ?
If we change the state of one of the electrons, they lose their entanglement. Affecting one electron does nothing to the other one.
@@chrishorst2124 thx a lot. Okay, that explains a lot for me :)