EPR & Bell: What's Wrong with My Scenario?

  • Thread starter theargosy
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Bell Epr
In summary: Welcome to PhysicsForums, theargosy!You can have an initial spin and know what it is. That particle will not be entangled with anything, however.Entangled particles are in what is called a "superposition" of states. They do not have a fixed knowable value until measured.In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of entangled particles and their behavior when one particle is measured and its state changes. It is mentioned that an Earth-bound observer has no way of knowing if the spin of the entangled particle has changed due to the traveler reaching Mars or if the measurement was performed by the traveler before arriving. The conversation also addresses the impossibility of monitoring a particle's spin without measuring it and the fact
  • #1
theargosy
9
0
What is wrong with my scenario?

A traveler is about to embark on a mission to Mars. A technician is responsible for communications with the traveler. An entangled pair of electrons is prepared, one to make the trip to Mars and one to remain on Earth.

When the traveler reaches Mars he changes the spin on his entangled electron. Simultaneously by measurement on both sides, the Earth-bound electron changes spin.

By prior agreement, the change in spin indicates the arrival of the traveler on Mars, by faster than light communication.

Brian Wachter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You can know the spin only if you measure it.
If you measure it, you will get up or down.
It doesn't tell you if the spin has changed or not.
Remember the 2 electrons' spins were entangled.
So no electron has a definite spin to start with.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
The Earth observer had no way of knowing that the spin has changed with only one measurement.

Say he measures his particle and gets spin-up. He has no way of knowing whether he's performed the first measurement on the pair, the astronaut hasn't yet arrived and will measure spin-down when he arrives; or whether the astronaut has already arrived, performed the first measurement, and gotten spin-down.
 
  • #4
Nugatory said:
The Earth observer had no way of knowing that the spin has changed with only one measurement.

Say he measures his particle and gets spin-up. He has no way of knowing whether he's performed the first measurement on the pair, the astronaut hasn't yet arrived and will measure spin-down when he arrives; or whether the astronaut has already arrived, performed the first measurement, and gotten spin-down.

When the traveler leaves Earth both particles are spin up. The earth-bound particle will simply be monitored. When the traveler reaches Mars he resets his particle's spin. The technician records this as the signal that the traveler has reached Mars.
 
  • #5
eltodesukane said:
You can know the spin only if you measure it.
If you measure it, you will get up or down.
It doesn't tell you if the spin has changed or not.
Remember the 2 electrons' spins were entangled.
So no electron has a definite spin to start with.

You mean I can't have an initial spin and know what it is?
 
  • #6
theargosy said:
You mean I can't have an initial spin and know what it is?

Welcome to PhysicsForums, theargosy!

You can have an initial spin and know what it is. That particle will not be entangled with anything, however.

Entangled particles are in what is called a "superposition" of states. They do not have a fixed knowable value until measured.
 
  • Like
Likes theargosy
  • #7
theargosy said:
When the traveler leaves Earth both particles are spin up. The earth-bound particle will simply be monitored.

There's no way to do that. Two problems:
First, you can't "monitor" a particle's spin without measuring it. And once you perform that measurement, they're no longer entangled so all subsequent measurements of the two particles will be completely independent and uncorrelated.
Second, there is no such thing as two entangled particles in a known spin-up state - You can only have entanglement when the state of the two particles is a superposition of the two possible outcomes for the pair, and you don't know which you have until after you've performed the one measurement that breaks the entanglement.

If we're going to use the language of wave function collapse, an entangled state is something like ##|\psi\rangle=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}(|++\rangle+|--\rangle)## where ##|++\rangle## and ##|--\rangle## are the states "both particles are spin up" and "both particles are spin down". Any measurement performed on either particle causes the wave function to collapse randomly to either ##|++\rangle## or ##|--\rangle## and then you just have two independent particles both of which happened to have the same spin when we first looked at them, but are now evolving independently of one another.
 
  • #8
theargosy said:
When the traveler leaves Earth both particles are spin up.
In that case, the observer on Earth will always measure spin up, no matter what happens to the spin on Mars. So again no signal is sent.
 
  • #9
DrChinese said:
Welcome to PhysicsForums, theargosy!

You can have an initial spin and know what it is. That particle will not be entangled with anything, however.

Entangled particles are in what is called a "superposition" of states. They do not have a fixed knowable value until measured.
Thanks!
 
  • #10
Nugatory said:
The Earth observer had no way of knowing that the spin has changed with only one measurement.

Say he measures his particle and gets spin-up. He has no way of knowing whether he's performed the first measurement on the pair, the astronaut hasn't yet arrived and will measure spin-down when he arrives; or whether the astronaut has already arrived, performed the first measurement, and gotten spin-down.
Thank you.
 
  • #11
Avodyne said:
In that case, the observer on Earth will always measure spin up, no matter what happens to the spin on Mars. So again no signal is sent.
Thank you a bunch.
 
  • #12
Avodyne said:
In that case, the observer on Earth will always measure spin up, no matter what happens to the spin on Mars. So again no signal is sent.
I thank you!
 
  • #13
Avodyne said:
In that case, the observer on Earth will always measure spin up, no matter what happens to the spin on Mars. So again no signal is sent.
Thanks.
 
  • #14
Nugatory said:
There's no way to do that. Two problems:
First, you can't "monitor" a particle's spin without measuring it. And once you perform that measurement, they're no longer entangled so all subsequent measurements of the two particles will be completely independent and uncorrelated.
Second, there is no such thing as two entangled particles in a known spin-up state - You can only have entanglement when the state of the two particles is a superposition of the two possible outcomes for the pair, and you don't know which you have until after you've performed the one measurement that breaks the entanglement.

If we're going to use the language of wave function collapse, an entangled state is something like ##|\psi\rangle=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}(|++\rangle+|--\rangle)## where ##|++\rangle## and ##|--\rangle## are the states "both particles are spin up" and "both particles are spin down". Any measurement performed on either particle causes the wave function to collapse randomly to either ##|++\rangle## or ##|--\rangle## and then you just have two independent particles both of which happened to have the same spin when we first looked at them, but are now evolving independently of one another.
Thank you.
 

Related to EPR & Bell: What's Wrong with My Scenario?

1. What is EPR and Bell's theorem?

EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) and Bell's theorem are two important concepts in quantum mechanics that relate to the idea of entanglement, or the correlation of two or more particles in a way that is not explained by classical physics. EPR refers to a thought experiment proposed by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen in 1935, while Bell's theorem is a mathematical proof developed by John Stewart Bell in 1964 that shows the limitations of classical physics in explaining quantum phenomena.

2. What is the significance of EPR and Bell's theorem?

EPR and Bell's theorem have important implications for our understanding of the fundamental nature of reality. They demonstrate that quantum mechanics cannot be explained by classical physics and that there are inherent uncertainties and non-local connections between particles at the subatomic level. This challenges our traditional ideas about causality and locality and has profound implications for fields such as quantum computing and communication.

3. How do EPR and Bell's theorem relate to each other?

EPR and Bell's theorem are closely related concepts that both deal with the idea of entanglement. EPR presents a thought experiment that highlights the non-local connections between entangled particles, while Bell's theorem provides a mathematical proof that shows the limitations of classical physics in explaining these phenomena. Together, they demonstrate the strange and counterintuitive nature of quantum mechanics.

4. What are some misconceptions about EPR and Bell's theorem?

One common misconception is that EPR and Bell's theorem disprove the theory of relativity. While they do challenge our understanding of causality and locality, they do not contradict the principles of relativity. Another misconception is that EPR and Bell's theorem prove the existence of faster-than-light communication. However, this is not the case as quantum entanglement does not allow for the transmission of information.

5. How do EPR and Bell's theorem impact our understanding of the universe?

EPR and Bell's theorem have had a significant impact on our understanding of the universe, challenging our traditional beliefs about causality and locality. They have also played a crucial role in the development of quantum technologies such as quantum computing and communication. Additionally, they have opened up new avenues for research and exploration in the field of quantum mechanics, leading to a deeper understanding of the fundamental nature of reality.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
840
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
8
Views
716
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
41
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
944
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top