Missing Phenomenon

Duster

I recall hearing about a phenomenon where atoms are somehow bound. The example went something like this:

Pairs of atoms are contained; both with a single valent electron that rotate opposite each other, (not sure what element it was) but the atoms do not share these electrons. The electrons operate in tandem and if one electrons orbit is reversed the other responds spontaneously by reversing its own orbit.
The atoms are then isolated and removed from one and other. Then, one of the electrons is bombarded and its rotation is reversed. The rotation of the other ‘bound’ electron spontaneously also alters it’s rotation to counteract the other atom. This experiment was done not only across a lab, but across the country. It also appears that the electrons reverse their orbits at exactly the same moment, not pending the distance.

Does anyone know what this phenomenon is called?

I would like to read up on any new information regarding this. I also have a few applications for something like this. By helping me track down this missing phenomenon, I would certainly be able to add more here.

Thanks in advance for any help provided.

Duster

actionintegral

I think the term you are looking for is "quantum entanglement"

Duster

No. But close. I have a partner in thought that I (lucky me)spoke with about this issue. While "quantum entanglement" is an offshoot of the idea, I believe it's Bells Theorem. However, my source was not able to recall if this was dealing with electrons or photons. I have to believe it's electrons as photons hold no mass, and it's arguable if photons have motion other than linier.

Allow me to elaborate on why I am so interested.
A cousin of my wife is involved in a project that deals with quantum switching. This implies the use of electrons to act as a binary switch. By moving a valent electron or charging the atom with an additional electron, it can act as a binary switch. This implies that (in the right lab) electrons can be read.

If Bells theorem holds true, this implies reading electrons as binary bits, and the fact that they can be switched, and altered in real time(instantaneously), without regard to distance, would make interstellar, or coast to coast communication much faster then even before, and that is understated.. Combined with certain modulation principals, I will out do Bill Gates, At&T and anyone else who implies that they have our best interests at heart.

Then, Think of the big bang. If atoms are paired in their infancy, then blown apart to make up our universe, and they were boud in their creation, perhaps we already have the ability to communicate with other galaxys. This is only hard because you have to find 2 needles in diffrent hay stacks on a galactic sence. (obserd, but cool)


Thanks for all the reads.. maybe I'll get more now.

selfAdjoint

Duster, Bell's theorem does not concern itself with which kind of particle, or whether there is mass or not, but rather just with local realistic systems with properties that can be varied over a small finite set (idealized as two-state). You'll get a lot of argument on this forum about just which assumptions Bell really made, but they do not include particle physics particulars.

Duster

OK Understood, and my source, Rick, who holds patents in modulation methods, was sure he recalled that Bell's theorem concerned photons. I'm not sure I have hit on the correct answer yet, but I feel we are close.

Duster

The theorem must state that alll matter is bound and that balence is only achieved when it becomes fixed, and observable.
.
I beleve there is another answer... but it is not easy and I am not smart enough to quantify it.
I then propsed a question that took 64 reads to be answered.
If electorns can be read, I have no breasking point and it WILL be true.

I am not finished




Who can tell what an electrons path will be. If the units are 'entagled" I Am happy.
Physics is always quantifiable. I a not he who quantifies. I am he who proposes.
I am not as smart as those whom help.
I am loyal to those who try
All I ask if to be defined.

Jerrod

selfAdjoint

As far as I can see this statement has no physical meaning. It certainly has nothing to do with Bell's Theorem.