Quantum 101 Episode 5: Quantum Entanglement Explained

[@samferrer]

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

[@gandjalfthegreen2143]

Classical physics is absolutely relevant to objects of sizes humans usually interact with. Branching out does not mean everything has to be revisited.

[@NatureBoy-b2h]

I disagree. Quantum physics is best understood when you understand classical physics and its limitations. This progression gives a richer understanding of the concepts that QP requires.

[@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.

[@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?

[@DavidRoyle-i4u]

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.

[@Eztoez]

@@spinifex3715 They don't spin. If electrons spun, their outer edge would have to move about a million times the speed of light. Look at spin as inherent angular momentum. Its just a property like mass or charge. Electrons do NOT physically spin.

[@andrewjamsa3126]

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

[@MOAB-UT]

Help me understand better please. Could that particle automatically assume an opposite orientation- regardless of separation? So then it does not always have to actually change based on the other, but be what it is. Like if I rip a piece of paper in half- one piece is smaller, the other is automatically larger. It did not change- it was always like that.

[@sampleoffers1978]

@@MOAB-UT Yeah it's not changing in the premise, it's traits are based on the other but not reactive. Though proving reaction would be cray

[@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.

[@edwardbaker1331]

All of matter is a sustained thought in the mind of God.

[@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.

[@WingZeroDuality]

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]

❤

[@MOAB-UT]

What if they don't actually change, but were always opposite, the instant they were separated, automatically?

[@SC-bg8wf]

This is a very clear explanation of what quantum entanglement means.

[@azizpalace]

Excellent explanation of Entanglement due to the coin example . It made easier to understand

[@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 😊

[@euphoricbacon]

Look up Canary Island experiments

[@Richard-wg9ek]

I think that the web of dark matter that is all around at a ratio of 5 to 1 compared to regular matter I speculate that particles can actually communicate thru this web kind of like trees and vegetation are able to communicate thru the various fungi and roots thru the ground that connects all trees and vegetation I think dark matter may be responsible for quantum entanglement there is an interconnectedness to all dark matter and this is shown thru the way that matter is affected by gravity that exists in the quantum field that actually warps space time dark matter may very well be responsible for metaphysical phenomena that is observed sometimes I could be wrong but I could be right lol

[@Richard-wg9ek]

Connectedness could explain how the result can be predicted even before photons have time to communicate any info at the speed of light connectedness would be instantaneous

[@robman80808]

I think what confuses me is that you create the entangled particles to have opposite properties. Then when you measure them, they have opposite properties. We say that measuring the first effectively caused the property in the second to have a definite property. But how do we know, for sure, that they both didn't already have this definite (and opposite to each other) property before being measured, since the only way to know its property is to measure it? Like I said, it confuses me.

[@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

[@perm4125]

One thing I didn't understand - if they have opposite spin at the start, this will just carry on when you measure the spin at a later time. So why do you need entanglement?

[@edwardbaker1331]

The direction can be changed by experiment, with the resulting effect on the entangled particle observed far distant.

[@brianegendorf2023]

I still say "entanglement" undersells it. The particles are connected..period. Its the only way to explain the "spooky action at a distance".

[@juliancourtland-smith8917]

Can I use QEE to predict whether the red or black will come up next in roulette at the casino?

[@edwardbaker1331]

One in every crowd.

[@harrycordell6123]

What about how this applies to thinking and creating realities?😊

[@hello75986]

I wish there was a video that explained the “magic trick” 0:39?

[@stratorunner1]

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

[@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

[@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.

[@MOAB-UT]

Does it change or is it simply and instantly what it is at the second of separation? That is what I don't get. Seems like if you empty a glass full of water, instantly, the glass vessel is empty. No magic there- even if 1 million miles away. It happened instantly, and as a result of the action. Am I not understanding something?

[@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.

[@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.

[@minanovkiril]

You have to explain how 2 particles came to that position of entanglement in the first place, that is, was it a decay of a higher energy particle or not. First, explain that and than when they decay than they can be entangled. Faynemann diagrams entangle particles.

[@Republicnews-h3v]

Is it only timing observation or can you heat them charge them or influence them with fields

[@manofsan]

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

[@Eztoez]

Quantum Entanglement was first shown by the Stern Gerlach experiment in which their spins (an inherent property particles possess, like mass or charge) are opposite to one another after they have been entangled. Entanglement means instead of two separate particles doing their own thing, they are connected. There is no physical connection. No string or ropes joining them together. Instead, you need to remember particles exhibit wave and particle properties. Just like in the double slit experiment, in order to understand how a single particle can pass through both slits, you need to think of them as WAVES. Or to be a little more precise, mathematical constructs called Wavefunctions. So two entangled (or connected) particles are not two separate balls of matter, think of them each initially having their own wavefunction. After entanglement ,there is a single wavefunction that describes the properties of both objects, When the wave function is collapsed (ie measured) we can determine the spin of one, and therefore the spin of the other. There is no faster than light communication. We're talking about a mathematical construction - the wavefunction - nothing physical. Hope this helps a little.

[@MOAB-UT]

But what if they automatically assumed opposite orientations or spins by nature as soon as they are separated? Maybe the distance has nothing todo with anything? I welcome your thoughts as you seem smart. I am not. LOL.

[@KenWiggerAnotherAncientGamer]

I appreciate you sharing with us!

[@georgegrubbs2966]

When particles are entangled, they must have opposite states or spins, and there are only two states/spins. It's like a pair of gloves - one right hand and one left hand. Someone shakes up a pair of gloves, and then while blindfolded, puts a glove in Alice's container and the other one in Bob's container. When they open the containers, they know exactly what is in the other container.

[@Matt-Mech]

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.

[@godblessCL]

The first thing that comes to mind is another dimension that connects both particles.

[@Richard-wg9ek]

Dark matter

[@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?

[@MOAB-UT]

Right- what I was thinking. No big mystery. One will always be opposite, space and time don't matter. Cut paper in half- one side is larger, the other is automatically smaller. Maybe I just don't understand it well enough. It must be more complicated. I just don't see things changing instantly based on mere observation. Maybe it was always the opposite as a result of the separation.

[@T0NYD1CK]

I always feel that this aspect of quantum physics is presented back to front. The "entanglement" part is not the interesting bit because you CAN "entangle" a coin. Just slice it across the middle, put the heads part in one envelope and the tails part in another envelope. Do it in the dark so you don't know which is which then put the envelopes in your spaceships. When one is opened and found to be a head we will know that the other one will contain a tail. The interesting part, for me at least, would be in understanding exactly how the Bell's Inequality disproves that idea.

[@DaveMiller2]

Veritasium did a video about entanglement and spin that explains how Bells theorem disproves it.

[@davedevil83]

Question: Is this the same as a scenario in which you give person A a red sock in a box, and person B a green sock in a box. Neither person has seen inside their box, but they are told there is 1 x red, and 1 x green. In 10 years, when they open the box, the person with the green sock automatically knows that the other person has the red? - And then I guess my follow up, would be… what if it’s not socks, but Schrödinger’s cat? Are they both in superposition? What happens when one person opens the box and it’s dead? Is the other alive? Or can it still be In a superposition?

[@lepidoptera9337]

The basic effect is the same as with socks. What matters is that nobody changes the content of the boxes before we look inside them. In the same way spacetime doesn't change the energy in a quantum field, no matter how far it propagates.

[@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?

[@mxnokuma4335]

The answer is we don't need to. It's a particle.

[@timothylamont845]

Im sorry, but this does not really explain entanglement. It (very clearly) explains the results of entanglement, but not they how or why of entanglement. In the example of the two coins being flipped, the video says, If Alice sees heads, she knows Bob will see tails. But, does that mean Alice's coins stopped spinning first? And by doing so, somehow caused Bob's coin to land on tails (or his stopped first and caused hers (the order doesnt really matter, it is the causality I dont understand)? The video says they both flipped their respective coins. Presumably both coins are fair with a 50/50 chance to land on either face. Yet, while the second is still spinning, the first stops and causes the result of the second one? Clearly, my understanding is flawed, but explain that to me and THAT is closer to explaining entanglement.

[@lepidoptera9337]

The thing about quanta is that they are NOT coins. Quanta are not objects but small amounts of energy. We can excite the physical vacuum with a quantum of energy and that excitation will travel over long distance without being changed. It "remembers" what happened to it at the source. A spinning coin does not because the mechanism that removes the energy from the coin (friction) causes decoherence. A quantum measurement only causes partial decoherence, so SOME information about the source is retained. That a quantum is not localized can be seen trivially in the fact that energy-time uncertainty is just as valid for quantum detectors as it is for classical detectors. If we leave the detector's aperture open for a short amount of time only, then the detected amount of energy will show a spread that is wider for shorter aperture windows. That alone indicates that quanta have to be extended field states, but they are not classical field states. A quantum can not be represented by a classical wave packet. A wave packet can be represented by many quanta, though.

[@StevenBrener]

Why do 2 particles - A and B - become entangled? And, if then B becomes entangled with C, does that mean C and A are entangled too?

[@richdobbs6595]

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

[@andybrown6981]

I can't explain how three pidgeons knew there was a new puppy came to home, as they were all hanging around the porch although I never ever had them come close before. They communicate a bit differently.

[@HowardZaitchick]

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

[@danielalexander799]

Entangled particles share the same wave function . As soon as the wave function for one particle is measured, that measurement is recorded on the holographic surface of the universe, and the other half of the wave function is manifested by the other particle.

[@steakholder2119]

at 153 : one way to set this up x is to make sure they have opposite spins, eg in a magnetic field …. 😮 so you said you have set them up !

[@KarltonKemerait]

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

[@smokecreekstudio7320]

How does one transport a single particle?

[@Mister-o6m]

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

[@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.

[@mohammd]

This is all predicated on superposition, i.e. quantum behavior NOT being deterministic. If you believe quantum stuff is deterministic, and superposition is merely a result of our observational abilities instead of a reality of quantum behavior, then entanglement is simply two quantum objects maintaining their properties (spin, charge, etc...) even after they are separated. Amusingly simple. Note: There is no direct evidence of superposition. Superposition is merely the best framework we have for interpreting our observations of quantum behavior, and the math (wave-function) doesn't rule it out. Superposition is not a scientific truth, but more of a scientific plausibility and is aligned with our observations... none of that proves it's real. Personally I think the deterministic, non-superposition idea makes a lot more sense, and thus I believe entanglement is... a nothing burger. It's just something continuing to be the same thing even when separated from another thing that was once systematically tied to it. Of course, I could be totally wrong.

[@QuicksilverSG]

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.

[@λιμινιλ]

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".

[@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).

[@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.

[@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.

[@i-ska]

How can physicists be so sure that the change is instant beyond the speed of light? How do you prove that the change in one object doesn't travel and take affect at the other at light speed?

[@richardsaglimbene6947]

My “theory” is that information is somehow stored in the metaverse, possibly a specialized universe used for data storage. This storage is quickly and easily accessible from anywhere in our universe and from any other universe. Heck, it’s not much different from a data lake in computing today and it’s how we connect disparate applications. I firmly believe somehow our brain interacts with this metaverse data lake at a quantum level. How? I have no clue, but much like any skill some people are better it at then others. Same applies to particles.

[@Iceflkn]

What if half of an entangled pair went into a black hole? Would we be able to tell what's going on by the one that's still on the outside?

[@SairaSabir1443AH]

Quantum Experiment at Space Scale 2015 by China in space

[@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. ;-)

[@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.

[@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.

[@socrat12]

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?

[@kevo777ez]

Thank you ❤

[@mareklehocky2584]

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

[@mxnokuma4335]

No, we can't. This was explained in the video.

[@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?

[@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.

[@dennisjohnson8753]

Good explanation

[@maxgluteus4263]

Hawking chair of a communication perimeter institute?

[@JonathanJollimore-w9v]

I think quantum mechanics has everything to do with gluing spacetime together with matter so that matter and space time can talk

[@itzed]

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

[@mxnokuma4335]

No, only 2 particles can be entangled together.

[@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.

[@EnduroTainment]

All of these explanations seem to be over complicating something that should be pretty obvious. It’s not magic if I’m understanding it properly. Basically it is like two simple magnets in space that are bonded together through their opposite forces attracting(entangled). If they become separated, or blown apart, the trajectory will have some calculable opposite symmetrical spin, mimicking their entangled state. I imagine this is simple physics. So if they travel through empty space in their own directions, UNDISTURBED, then obviously they will still have their opposite “spins” whenever measured down the road. I don’t see how this whole thing is some great find. Obviously they are not connected in any direct physical sense any longer. Only connected in a measurable sense. Whooptie doo? What am I missing?

[@np9119]

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

[@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?

[@ericathompson297]

Purchase a text there are several if you need references

[@august3101]

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

[@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

[@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.?

[@HerfingPug]

Good Lord! The universe truly is an amazing place.

[@sergeydenisov15]

local amusement park is better in this respect

[@rasubs_]

@@sergeydenisov15it’s still part of the universe ❤

[@vinod8june]

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 ++++++++++++

[@abhilashassariparambilraja2534]

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

[@brianolson8293]

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

[@jamalalafgani1137]

einsten focuse about entangelment because he was looking for quantum gravity teory and tried to describe what the f is dark energy

[@sampleoffers1978]

Prediction based on observation is faster then light in the premise. Ya know

[@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.

[@NoseyNick]

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

[@NoseyNick]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eInRmXh6grp9qpo

[@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

[@DavidDecker-j7z]

Quantum entanglement is magic. There have been magicians that have demonstrated it. There was someone who said all physics experiments should be evaluated by a magician

[@daviso4954]

If the particle having hidden information is not possible, maybe the information responsible for quantum entanglement exists in space/time.

[@lepidoptera9337]

That's the entire point: there is no such information.

[@daviso4954]

@@lepidoptera9337 I'm thinking of that possibility if there is any validity to simulation theory.

[@lepidoptera9337]

@@daviso4954 Simulation assumes some form of calculation. The physical vacuum is exactly the opposite of that. Absolutely no calculations are taking place. All the important things in physics (energy, momentum, angular momentum and charge) are happening because NOTHING is happening. Physics is what is left after we take everything away. It is highly counterintuitive that what is left after nothing is left is still so much, I give you that. :-)

[@SairaSabir1443AH]

Germany hiedal University by Asif Ibn Barkhiya did a whole Palace of Queen Sheeba.

[@NatureBoy-b2h]

So when the Bible has the hubris to say that God is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient, it is speaking perfect Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Physics. The “odds” of a simple man of early humanity knowing that to be able to state it, then to write what God did proving His attributes, which was later attested to centuries later in fulfilled prophecy and historical outcomes, is just so “comforting” to me.

[@sonicesb]

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

[@Aliens-Are-Our-Friends2027]

because everything is made of the One God Particle. Everything is made of the same "One Thing". All is One.

[@andruss2001]

Thanks! Seems that entanglement along with Delayed Choice experement implication do away with the space-time. At the beginning we had Newtonian prison, then came stretchy space-time, and finally we got aquainted with quantum freedom. But we cannot merry it neither to newtonian prison nor Einstain's space-time. We better throw away our graduations and titles. Unless we are ready to become a laughing stock as we step into Alice's Wonderland

[@lepidoptera9337]

It doesn't. What it does away with is that spacetime has an effect on energy. Flat spacetime does not have any effect on energy. It can propagate through the entire visible universe without being affected.

[@Pottery4Life]

Thank you.

[@philipwelsby292]

So many presentations claim to explain quantum entanglement, but all they are doing is to describe it, and that is not an explanation.

[@richtrophicherbs6463]

Fascinating stuff, but am I alone in finding the background music unnecessarily distracting and annoying?

[@TheOceanLoader]

I still think this is overly simplistic. There must be some latency, otherwise we can have modems that would transmit over the internet that bridges galaxies using quantum entangled bits (0's and 1's)?

[@lepidoptera9337]

The reason why this correlation can not be used is because the sequences at the endpoints are random. One can not force one side to all up, which would require the other end to be all downs. Instead we are getting a random sequence of ups and downs on both ends, no matter how we measure the spins. Only the correlation between the two ends is not random.

[@HeyItsFlix]

PARALLELLLL WORRRRLDDDS

[@BenjaminGatti]

Not really what it does: more like if you collect a bunch of data from Alice and Bob, then bring that data together, you can filter the data until you get some small subset of data with more correlations than 50/50. Then you scream eureka and burn the data.

[@DavidRoyle-i4u]

The particles need to share the exact momentum

[@luthfianpramanda3654]

So there is a certainity in quantum mechanics🤔

[@arieksk]

This is undeniable proof that the creator is omnipresent in all matters in this universe. This is supported by the Wheeler double-slit experiment. All the atoms and subatomic matters are behaving as if controlled by a law or force that can only be explained by the act of God.