Quantum 101 Episode 5: Quantum Entanglement Explained

Quantum entanglement is one of the most intriguing and perplexing phenomena in quantum physics. It allows physicists to create connections between particles that seem to violate our understanding of space and time.
This video discusses what quantum entanglement really is, and the experiments that help us understand it. The results of these experiments have applications in new technologies that will forever change our world.
Join Katie Mack, Perimeter Institute’s Hawking Chair in Cosmology and Science Communication, over 10 short forays into the weird, wonderful world of quantum science. Episodes are published weekly, subscribe to our channel so you don’t miss an update.
Want to learn more about quantum concepts? Visit perimeterinstitute.ca/quantum... to access free resources.
Follow Perimeter:
Twitter: / perimeter
LinkedIn: / perimeter-institute
Instagram: / perimeterinstitute
Facebook: / pioutreach
Perimeter Institute (charitable registration number 88981 4323 RR0001) is the world’s largest independent research hub devoted to theoretical physics, created to foster breakthroughs in the fundamental understanding of our universe, from the smallest particles to the entire cosmos. Be part of the equation: perimeterinstitute.ca/donate

[@andrewjamsa3126]

among all the youtube videos i've watched, this is the first time i'm starting to understand quantum behavior. thanks!

[@Inquiring_Together]

Yes, entanglement creates something spooky indeed. I think the part about choice in the matter, between Bob and Alice to discern the mystery of entanglement touches on it. Instead, choice-less awareness is key. Something humans have difficulty in understanding and maintaining because for millennia we have structured society around the observer not being the observed. I believe, that education of this sort can make choiceless awareness (in line with quantum) the natural perception of an individual and society evolve as such.

[@binarasenevirathne9473]

❤

[@ianbrian3381]

I dont understand what makes particles entangled. I understand the behaviour as explained in the video (thanks) - whats an example of entangled particles? Where are they found?

[@user-cw4vd7dl7w]

It's the impact of 2 particles that collide near the speed of light

[@spinifex3715]

Just as a basic understanding. but in the inner-most shell of an atom exist 2 electrons, one spins one way, whilst the other spins the other way, obviously if you can separate these electrons, you only need to find the spin of one electron to work out the spin of the other. This is my understanding and would love to be proven wrong to learn more.

[@KumaBones]

Einstein's theory is still consistent, because Information isn't "traveling"

[@leanguyff4695]

Yes

[@riasharma3927]

It's more about correlation.

[@jonmtifa]

It seems the collapsed state of a pair of particles is predetermined when they become entangled, to later be revealed when one of them is observed.

[@KumaBones]

@@jonmtifa exactly.... you're just looking at a "set"

[@zamoth22]

So isn't that the same kind of experimental results as the photon alot experiment? Isn't that also the same concept as Schrodinger's Cat? ​@@jonmtifa

[@samferrer]

Quantum entanglement is one of the reasons why the whole education system has to be revisited ... specially the one concerning physics.

[@Tooley2008]

Is it possible that there is some level of “entanglement” between all of life? That everything is connected in some way that we just haven’t been able to measure yet?

[@ryanisber2353]

No once you measure an entangled particle they cease to be entangled… so maybe you can have particles entangling and unentangling at any given moment but to have a particle not be measured then you need to isolate both entangled particles in a dark cold vacuum… thats not life and that wouldn’t be desirable… for obvious reasons

[@markgo106]

life is absolutely entangled

[@darrellminx5459]

That is part of the nature of duality. Not a single thing inherently exists by itself. Yes we and all things are connected.

[@Deipnosophist_the_Gastronomer]

Do you suffer from quantum entanglement? Try our No. 5 Bond Maintenance Conditioner. For quantum that looks healthier, feels more manageable and is more resistant to damage.

[@EpizodesHorizons]

I've seen quite a few videos on (theory of) entanglement, but sadly, I haven't found any on how to create an entangled pair in practice (not theory). I think this is the more intriguing aspect - how are these "particles" (or are they "fields") "entangled", and how do you keep them entangled? Thanks.

[@yoadknux]

most feasible way today is generation of entangled photon pairs by spontaneous parametric down conversion, this was done by various quantum optics groups throughout the world

[@rickdaniels1000]

Social media 😊

[@dennisjohnson8753]

Good explanation

[@MindThemNot]

Sorry to say that, but, tbh, you didn't explain a single thing about entanglement, you just described its effects, that's observation, not explanation.

[@jemborg]

The explanation is... because "maths".

[@NoosaHeads]

Thank you for saying that. I was going to make the same point myself. (She also didn't explain how entanglement is proven, experimentally.)

[@jemborg]

@@NoosaHeads you take a particle with 0 spin and split it into two. To maintain conversation of energy one has a positive spin and the other a negative. Place them ten feet apart. Measure one's spin and in 5 billionth of a second, faster than light can travel 5 feet, measure the other's.... It will _always_ be the opposite value.

[@knowinghimministries4556]

Nah you just aren’t smart enough to

[@xensan76]

Yeah, at least tell us how Einstein came up with the idea.

[@mikejurney9102]

If one is spin up, then the other is spin down... in the same magnetic field. But if the measuring apparatus are totally separated from each other, then which direction is spin up and which is spin down? After twisting and turning through various gravitational fields, how can we say which way is up?

[@Pottery4Life]

Thank you.

[@user-ws7gt5zj5d]

Does the gates of a quantum computer have control over the direction of the electron spin while in an entangled state

[@robertmccoy7188]

How do they become entangled? When we measure one how do we know where the other one is? It could be across the room or across the universe.

[@matthawk2025]

To "entangle" the coins in the analogy given....imagine you bond them to a rod with the coins at each end. When laying on a surface, the coins are bonded to the rod such that one coin is facing up and the other facing down. Random flip of the entangled coins on a rod assembly is like measuring the spin for example at one coin end. The direction found at the measured end is probabilistic, but the other end coin will always be found to be the opposite/correlated. The measured result at the opposite end apparently is "instantaneous"(faster than light). Are there any restrictions on how LONG you can wait and still get this measurement correlation?

[@sergeydenisov15]

Well spotted. In fact, what she described is not (yet) entanglement but classical correlations. There is way more things needed to be discussed (Bell's inequality etc) to grasp the concept.

[@smokecreekstudio7320]

How does one transport a single particle?

[@manofsan]

What is the crucial difference between computing and communication that allows quantum entanglement to be used for one but not the other?

[@stratorunner1]

Thankiuu. Btw? This is a description , the phenomena is not explain here. Tha possibility of somekind messaging by entanglement , is possible.

[@chenzenzo]

Quantum Entanglement means you know that something is. You change it to the opposite of itself. Then you reset it the position of each particle within an absolute state: as in your giving them an option but setting them into a state of absolution. Quantum understanding gives us the ability to bring new concepts to old theories.

[@bettersteps]

Fantastic coin analogy. Spot on understandable.

[@sergeydenisov15]

False feeling. What she described is classical correlations, not (yet) entanglement.

[@bettersteps]

@@sergeydenisov15 Who said anything about entanglement?

[@sergeydenisov15]

@@bettersteps Then what you understood? "Fantastic analogy (c) - related to what?

[@bettersteps]

@@sergeydenisov15 I'd try to explain myself to you but I think it would go over your head.

[@sergeydenisov15]

@@bettersteps Then don't do it. It's fine.

[@paulmendez7679]

Instead of sending/receiving information based the observed state of a single entangled pair (which is not useful due to randomness), could you send/receive information using multiple pairs based on which pairs have been observed? A binary code of sorts. 3:04

[@j.carrotshorts1821]

there would be no way to know if they have been observed though

[@amitbhoirrr]

I still don’t understand if Entanglement means 2 coins are such pair that they are always opposite to each other then one head means other is tale.So once they entangled then it’s done one head and other tale is set no matter you measure it what distance and this is what I am struggling to understand if again I change one coin from head to tale does that set other coin tale to head ? If no then I don’t know what is confusing someone explain me please

[@schmetterling4477]

No, it doesn't. To stay in the coin example let's say the two coins are completely entangled. So one is always the opposite of the other. The correlation (or better anti-correlation) is 100%. Now let's say one of the two observers flips one half of his coins randomly, again. So one half stays entangled, the other half takes on a random value. Now the correlation of one half is perfect and the correlation of the other half is random (i.e. there is a 50% chance that it's correct and an equal chance that it's wrong). This means the correlation between the outcomes now falls from 100% correlated to only 75% correlated. It's still more than the 50% that we would expect if both observers would perform random tosses on each coin. That is what happens in quantum mechanics. We simple reduce the correlation between the outputs by introducing an additional "randomizing" process. The math doesn't work the same way as in the coin toss example, but the physics is quite similar to what I just said.

[@TXNYNOT]

PARALLELLLL WORRRRLDDDS

[@user-wk9un6qt1j]

OK, but can someone explain why we cannot do this scenario (or can we). Take 3 electrons, call them A,B and C - Entangle their spin such that A is entangled with B, B with C and C with A - now any measurement of particle A's spin results in a logical contradiction. If A is Up, B must be down and if B is down C must be Up .. which leaves both particle A and C in a Spin Up position. Help me understand. Thanks

[@j.carrotshorts1821]

only 1 particle can be entangled with any other particle. A can be entangled with either C *or* B

[@richdobbs6595]

It's a bug in the implementation of the simulation that is our universe?

[@FallenStarFeatures]

Alice's conclusion that Bob's coin toss turned out the opposite of her own is based on the presumption that both coins remain entangled with each other continuously throughout the period after they traveled apart. If so, then Alice's conclusion will turn out to be correct. Neither Alice nor Bob, however, can confirm whether that entanglement remained intact, and thus cannot confirm whether the outcome of Bob's coin toss was in fact determined by that presumed entanglement.

[@MarvelousLXVII]

Well obviously if they are setup to have opposite spins they will always be the opposite. If you have two exact clocks and set one at midnight and one at 6:00 they will always be opposite. Am I wrong here?

[@user-sh7ij5dm7f]

I wonder if quantum entanglement can be used as a gateway, or portal to warp from one side to the other instantaneously.

[@kkrup5395]

You didn't get the topic then. This video is too short to explaint it tbh

[@sergeydenisov15]

Surely. It can even be used to steal money from an ATM

[@sunroad7228]

"In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. Time taken in stocking energy to build an energy system, adding to it the time taken in building the system will always be longer than the entire useful lifetime of the system. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future" (2017).

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

Light waves of a common source will have Quantum Entanglement with spin or polarization relative to new photon oscillations. This can be explained by spherical 4πr² geometry based on Huygens’ Principle: That says: “Every point on a wave front may be considered a source of secondary spherical wave, which spreads out in the forward direction at the speed of light”. This process is relative to the spherical surface that forms a manifold or boundary condition for the characteristics of quantum entanglement. The polarization or spin will be the same for the whole of the spherical surface. This will be observed as opposite spin on opposite sides of the light sphere.

[@freddywong2638]

Sometime I just thinking when you did the experiment on earth and got the result, will it be the same result as you do it in space or on Mars.

[@Beanpolr]

The laws of physics don't change based on where you are.

[@freddywong2638]

@@Beanpolr I'm not a physic guy, but I know speed of light in space and on earth is slightly different. Just thought about what if you do the entanglement experiment in a no gravity environment like space or a planet with no magnetic field like Mars. May be there is some factor that we missed and that'll affect the result of the experiment?

[@Beanpolr]

@@freddywong2638 The only reason light moves at slightly different speeds is because it acts as a particle, and so it moves slower through matter than empty space. In the case of quantum entanglement, there isn't anything moving or transferring at all, the change is instantaneous.

[@rafikbarseghian912]

I have been listening to this entanglements for so many times but no one is explaining where does any particle of these two come from ?

[@schmetterling4477]

From a source that can produce entangled quanta. For optical spin entanglement experiments this is a non-linear crystal that produces one pair of photons for something like 100,000 single photons from a laser source.

[@itzed]

Why does it have to be just two particles? Can’t three get entangled, ala menage a trois?

[@mareklehocky2584]

I think we can use this method to comunicate (controlling) in long distances (Earth - Mars) without any delay...

[@donnythedealer9761]

If entanglement is about measurement or observing, then what is it? Is it a physical property of a particle? IE, If you COULD measure a particle's entanglement with another, would you take it as a reading the same way you would with radius of the particle? Is it a PHYSICAL property or is it an imaginary property we've invented to patchwork explain different effects?

[@schmetterling4477]

Entanglement is a special case of correlation between two systems. At the end of the day the only thing we are measuring with an entangled pair of spins is the angle between the preferred directions of the two detectors.

[@shidneyseldon]

i heard one professor said it's simultaneous regardless of distance. now, this video says it's not - meaning you can only predict the future.

[@bloodonthesnow]

I believe the video meant "predict the future" because it would otherwise take 10 years for the radio signals to arrive that said what state the other coin is in. The "future" that is being predicted is the message saying what state the coin is in. But since the particles were entangled, you don't need to wait for that message.

[@NoseyNick]

Oh my, Alice and Bob are all grown up! 😮

[@NoseyNick]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eInRmXh6grp9qpo

[@ericathompson297]

Purchase a text there are several if you need references

[@NoferTrunions]

I saw hoping for an explanation of the "physics" of entanglement. It actually sounds like something Flat Landers would experience without any explanation. Are we missing a dimension? Does String Theory explain it?

[@schmetterling4477]

Special relativity explains it. Entanglement has to work the way it does or relativity would be violated.

[@NoferTrunions]

@@schmetterling4477 It's behavior is well known but is not understood. The video itself uses the words: Magic, Signal, Communication, Messages and in the end says we' don't know how it works. That's my point. While I know nothing of the mathematics involved (although I have a BS in math), it sounds like at this level of understanding is only mathematical - the physics is a mystery. Hence the concept of the involvement of higher dimensions intuitively has at least a modicum of merit. They mention Einstein didn't seem to have rigorous ideas on the matter.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@NoferTrunions Yes, the video is nonsense. So what? So nothing. Most KZbin videos are nonsense. ;-)

[@NoferTrunions]

@@schmetterling4477 Engineers would joke that about mathematicians. It's ironic that back in college in the early 70's, us math and science majors always looked down on engineers. Personally I knew engineers that had trouble changing oil in their cars - hence m bias. I was welding up rusty Studebakers in high school. But then finally I realized engineering was where it's at.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@NoferTrunions That's cool and all, but none of this is about engine oil. ;-)

[@maxgluteus4263]

Hawking chair of a communication perimeter institute?

[@ronaldsnelgrove7921]

Your Canadian viewers will recognize those coins.

[@MultaGemems]

Good Lord! The universe truly is an amazing place.

[@sergeydenisov15]

local amusement park is better in this respect

[@august3101]

conservation of energy beats space-time. the fact the direction of spin mesurement does not matter is THE BIG DEAL.

[@abhilashassariparambilraja2534]

why quantum entanglement slow down its speed if we are vigilante about it's speed

[@zhavlan1258]

Скорость света в вакууме упорядочено захватывается и регулируется гравитационными полями при переходе «сфер» влияния. Возможно подтвердить экспериментально с помощью гибридного оптоволоконного гироскопа (на основе опыта Майкельсона 1881-2015 г). Используя гибридный оптоволоконный гироскоп, можно измерить скорость автомобиля по прямой

[@user-ne4gc1mg5e]

The reality of quantum physics Entanglement is what Einstein referred to as "spooky action at a distance." is the central riddles of quantum physics. The particle-photon A is 10x km from the point 0. The particle-photon B is 100x km from the point 0. Both photons were fired simultaneously but arrived to point 0 at the same instant. How is this possible?

[@peterw3160]

It’s not yet human communication as we know it. But IT IS faster than light communication of information.

[@schmetterling4477]

No, it isn't. It's mostly a misunderstanding of the term "information transfer".

[@lenm3532]

Thank you for taking the time to explain quantum entanglement and make this video. This video states we can’t use it to send communications but this other video says quantum entanglement communications already exists and they have working systems using it already. kzbin.info/www/bejne/aHSUlmWAmsmWeK8 What if this is true? Will it ever be availability in the public sector? Ever since I first learned of quantum entanglement I envisioned scientists figuring out how to communicate with it. Just imagine no signal loss, no need for excessive power to amplify a signal, no delay communications from anywhere to anywhere. Real-time 8k video feeds from a spacecraft or probe / rover on another planet that can be remote controlled in real-time. Interstellar sensors that can warn us ahead of time of solar flares or other interstellar threats. Cell phones that work from anywhere not requiring a cell tower. The internet of things on steroids forget ip v6 hello ip v8 as we would need way more ip addresses to handle a world with so much connectivity. I hope I see this someday if the world can grow up vs blows up and resets again like so many civilizations before us that we know or don’t know about. Maybe we make it to a type 1 civilization and beyond or maybe we don’t.

[@Ryan-gx4ce]

It's very difficult to keep an entangled state at large distances

[@manofsan]

@@Ryan-gx4ce - I thought quantum correlations work independent of distance. Isn't it better to say that it's difficult to keep an entangled state for a longer period of time?

[@sergeydenisov15]

the point is that it cannot be used for INSTANTENOUS (or superluminal) communications

[@brianolson8293]

But what if the other person does not flip the coin only one of them flips

[@IronicallyVague]

So what if you constructed a ring of nothing but positive particle's and then made a matching negative entangled ring? If something passes thru one entangled side wouldn't it also pass thru the other too? Guess not, oh well I tried

[@antonnilsson3793]

but if it was a predestined outcome then she didn't predict anything because she already had the answer before she threw the coin, so it wasn't information received at a great distance but just two people that knew the result of each others coin toss.

[@davez4285]

That doesn’t explain the entanglement at all. What’s the mechanism or evidence that state of one is determined and it will instantly control, set, communicate the other even they are light years away? If both entangled particles have super synchronization, both can have the effect as described as entanglement, but they are just synchronized not entangled. Can anyone answer?

[@user-cw4vd7dl7w]

The particles need to share the exact momentum

[@sonicesb]

If entanglement is a reality, then our earth and humans can also be an experiment of someone else. Isn't it?

[@tqm790]

What will happen when Alice and Bob measure at the same time?

[@bjarkenielsen8515]

They realize that they have nothing to use their coins for in space. Therefore the coins disappear (as a social contruct) Alice and Bob are left with ambiguity and a collapse of their structures of meaning. "Was this worth 10 years of my life?", will be Alice's primary thought "I didn't even get to flip the damn coin!", will be Bob's primary thought "How am I going to get home", will be Alice and Bobs non-entangled, yet shared thought

[@anikettiwari2704]

I think einstein warn us to not to beyond the speed of light🌠

[@valueofnothing2487]

You're missing the point that the wave is collapsing when one person allows it to be measured. This is because both particles are described by the same wave. It doesn't violate Einstein's relativity because it takes time to move the once they're described by a wave across the world. You took a collapsible iron bar over the edges of the Earth It would take time to do that and it would obey relativity. The fact that we wouldn't know a property of it until we measured it It's not violate relativity. The real problem is that people speak like we have a particle of one spin and a particle or another spin. That's not accurate. Instead we have a single probability distribution that shows two locations where a particle might be measured with higher frequency.

[@phillippardo5712]

Thanks this comment seems to help me a bit on what's going on. I guess it's kinda like the double slit experiment, once the wave is interfered with, it changes it's nature.?

[@rebokfleetfoot]

what is so hard to understand? to be entangled they must first share the same point in space time, that 'moment', if you like, travels outward at the speed of light forever, if we intercept it in both places, they must be correlated in time, they shared that moment,. what is hard to understand about that?

[@quantumentanglementsolved2531]

There’s no evidence to support the claim that an entangled particle can affect the other pair at a distance. There’s a correlation. Accepted. But we don’t know how it actually happened. But is quantum entanglement really that mysterious?

[@schmetterling4477]

No, it is not. It follows trivially from special relativity.

[@np9119]

Quantum entanglement is like two balls connected to each other except they are not balls and they are not connected

[@luthfianpramanda3654]

So there is a certainity in quantum mechanics🤔

[@zachhuckchance]

1:58 unus annus unus annus

[@kenjohnson6101]

"hidden variables"?

[@schmetterling4477]

No.

[@user-er8bj2wj1j]

I am a Clan psychic.Respected by even the Elders.I Can "Think" a thought at a receptive,calm person.That person now "knows" is Aware that a new thought is in his mind-and he Knows it is a "Message".One he did Not think.Vast distances mean Nothing.Distance is Zero.Quantum Entanglement IS your World-your Universe.Scientists found 2 "lover" type particles that have been Entangled for 4 Billion years.Westie

[@user-hk7uw3ib8m]

I love you

[@ca24tamie30]

🤩😍😲😄💘🎉👏😍🤔🧐There's no such as "spooky action at distance" if we consider that another universes, subdimensions or different worlds( whatever they are) that are lack of t and 3ds. as far as I see that at least two more of them are out there beside our physical universe. The relationship of our physical universe and other universes ( or worlds) is just like traveling transverse waves. They pass through each other with out interacting. Then everything is fine with me.

[@Beanpolr]

Then what would you call it, if there's no interaction between supposed "worlds"?

[@quantumentanglement]

👀

[@i-m-alien]

1...hello humans 2...so ur living in my constructed and created universe 3...those humans ,who are trying to understand the construction and execution of universe ,so you want my chair..? 4...why u want to understand the working procedure of universe...? 5...bcoz u want cheatcode to activate the free will facility 6...it is impossible to crack the ,my created universe in which ur present now 7...i am just making you walk from 1 stop to another stops ,and this stops are endless , so keep walking ++++++++++++

[@kinglymajor1465]

Ok, now tell us how much scientists really do know about entanglement. I suspect its more than they let on. 😅

[@schmetterling4477]

We know all about it. It's all in the library. Try to go there once in a while. ;-)

[@GugaBahr.]

Easy to explain. This happens when you take a loan with a bank during difficult times

[@anjalE30]

Quantum entanglement is NOT 2 separate objects Its ONE object, split into 2 Thats how the atoms are entangled

[@manofsan]

Alright, a single object, split into 2 (or 3, or 4, etc since you can entangle many) Does this entanglement (or its results) change when more and more particles are entangled together? How does entanglement for computing differ from entanglement for communication?

[@anjalE30]

@@manofsan key concept here is we're speaking about the QUANTUM level The atoms of an object

[@manofsan]

@@anjalE30 - have you heard of the idea of "weak measurement"? Is it conceivably possible to "weakly" measure an entangled particle/qubit without collapsing it?

[@HunterTiberisBojangles]

spooky

[@versastudio]

And let's not forget that ER=EPR. Each time some particles entangled there is a wormhole connecting them.

[@sambeltran3255]

I’m here cuz of Oppenheimer (I’ll lose interest in a couple of days)

[@schnitzelfilmmaker1130]

Well, Oppenheimer got me interested but I’m still here 2 months after seeing it. How’re u doing?

[@Josh-vy2zq]

The force quantum ...need the intellect to give him what he needs trough force so he most wait after I go to the bathroom and he can come on to take what I just made.

[@sergeydenisov15]

almost five minutes of smooth talking and hype -"strange"? "and we still not completely" with so little of substance. it is easy to make hand movements, take fancy poses but it is much harder to explain the concept of entanglement. the question is: What made these competent researchers participate in this?

[@schmetterling4477]

Money, I suppose. Somebody paid them to make these videos. At least I hope so. The usual statements that "nobody understands" are complete nonsense. Plenty of people understand this stuff just fine. The problem is that we don't have a good way of explaining it to the public. How, for instance, would you explain exponential notation to a kid who can't even count to ten, yet? What does 10^34 mean to such a kid? Not much, right? So how am I going to explain quantum mechanics to somebody who didn't have the attention span to memorize the definition of energy in high school? Quantum mechanics is all about energy. It's how nature really distributes energy between systems. Will the person who has no concept of what energy is understand how it is being distributed? Hardly.

[@sergeydenisov15]

@@schmetterling4477 I understand the importance of popularizing quantum (and other important but complex) concepts. However, popularization should not equate to trivialization or misrepresentation. The woman in the video describes phenomena that can be explained through classical correlations, whereas entanglement is more than that. To grasp entanglement, we have to consider Bell's inequalities; there's no way around them. But understanding them requires time and effort. Knowledge demands effort, and that's a message these people should convey -- instead of creating an illusion "Wow! Now I understand what entanglement is!"

[@schmetterling4477]

@@sergeydenisov15 The problem is that entanglement is a relativistic phenomenon. I doubt that even one in five physicists knows this at the moment. We don't teach it at the undergrad level that way and unless somebody is interested in relativistic quantum fields and cares about ontological problems at the same time it's just not an important thing to know. I just re-read Bell's original paper. He basically derives the equations using non-relativistic theory and then he notices in the conclusion that hidden variables would have to violate Lorentz invariance. That is more than just funny... that is tragic. Why? Because the original EPR paper that he is addressing was written by three relativists who did not notice that special relativity makes the tensor product form of quantum mechanics which lies behind entanglement inevitable. I can, for the life of me, not understand how Einstein could have missed this and Bell, at the latest, should have turned the argument around and instead of deriving how physics can not work, he should have used relativity to show how it has to work. That would have made way more sense.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@sergeydenisov15 The problem is that entanglement is a relativistic phenomenon. I doubt that even one in five physicists knows this at the moment. We don't teach it at the undergrad level that way and unless somebody is interested in relativistic quantum fields and cares about ontological problems at the same time it's just not an important thing to know. I just re-read Bell's original paper. He basically derives the equations using non-relativistic theory and then he notices in the conclusion that hidden variables would have to violate Lorentz invariance. That is more than just funny... that is tragic. Why? Because the original EPR paper that he is addressing was written by three relativists who did not notice that special relativity makes the tensor product form of quantum mechanics which lies behind entanglement inevitable. I can, for the life of me, not understand how Einstein could have missed this and Bell, at the latest, should have turned the argument around and instead of deriving how physics can not work, he should have used relativity to show how it has to work. That would have made way more sense.

[@NoosaHeads]

Disappointingly oversimplified and inadequate presentation. "2+2 equals 4..... there you go."

[@SciD1]

Of course, nobody ever explains exactly how entanglement is actually achieved. It's a load of bullshit anyway. Quantum mechanics is nothing more than a probabilistic mathematical framework based on the misunderstanding and the misinterpretation of the nature of light, and the double-slit experiment. Maybe that's why it is "probabilistic"... The math may be useful for replicating technology and chemical reactions, but it has no bearing on reality itself, because the theory is founded on the fallacy of quantum state superposition.

[@schmetterling4477]

Why are you telling us that you don't understand physics? ;-)

[@SciD1]

@@schmetterling4477 I'm telling you what you think is physics is actually bullshit.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@SciD1 That only appears to be so because you weren't paying attention in school. ;-)