- #1
tommmyyyy
- 2
- 0
- TL;DR Summary
- I frequently have problems imagining the EPR paradoxon, hence how I can imagine entangled states. Could someone explain me the error in my thoughts?
Dear community,
I frequently have problems imagining the EPR paradoxon, hence how I can imagine entangled states.
Let's say we have the Bell state of the basis /0> and /1>: Ψ = 1/√2 (\00>+\11>), where the first element of the ket belong to particle/qubit 1 and the second element to particle/qubit 2. After separating the two particles and measuring the state of particle 1, the superposition collapses and even though the distance, the outcome of measuring particle 2 is determined. EPR called this a paradoxon and that there is no analog to the macroscropic world/classical physics.
Well, it is hard to understand what's so strange about entangled states. If I understand it right, the system exists in a superposition although they are separated in space. But the superposition cannot be separated into a Kronecker/Tensor product. This is what entanglement means, right?
But how about the following thought:
BOX 1: dead cat \0> or living Cat \1>--Connection--BOX2: Poison that evaporates into BOX 1 \0> or no poison \1>
BOX1 in Tokyo.......Separation........BOX2 in New York
Let's open BOX2 now. There is no poisson. Hence, the Cat is alive. This also can be described as \00>+\11> and the outcomes of the "measurement", investigation here, are correlated.
I cannot see a loss of causality neither locality. Because the Boxes had a causal and local connection previously.
Wouldn't it be the same in the quantum world? In the system's perspective there is no superposition, but the superposition is only our mathematical description in order to define all eventualities.
Isn't superposition just a statistical concept in order to include all eventualities? But this doesn't mean that the physically the states are really in a superposition. Am I wrong?
The "spooky interaction at distance" is not spooky if the two entities have had interaction before separation. Logically the outcomes of investigations are correlated.
Where's my error? Why am I not baffled by quantum entanglement? Why do I think "so what"?
I feel somehow like the author of this paper:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9805074.pdf
Kind regards!
I frequently have problems imagining the EPR paradoxon, hence how I can imagine entangled states.
Let's say we have the Bell state of the basis /0> and /1>: Ψ = 1/√2 (\00>+\11>), where the first element of the ket belong to particle/qubit 1 and the second element to particle/qubit 2. After separating the two particles and measuring the state of particle 1, the superposition collapses and even though the distance, the outcome of measuring particle 2 is determined. EPR called this a paradoxon and that there is no analog to the macroscropic world/classical physics.
Well, it is hard to understand what's so strange about entangled states. If I understand it right, the system exists in a superposition although they are separated in space. But the superposition cannot be separated into a Kronecker/Tensor product. This is what entanglement means, right?
But how about the following thought:
BOX 1: dead cat \0> or living Cat \1>--Connection--BOX2: Poison that evaporates into BOX 1 \0> or no poison \1>
BOX1 in Tokyo.......Separation........BOX2 in New York
Let's open BOX2 now. There is no poisson. Hence, the Cat is alive. This also can be described as \00>+\11> and the outcomes of the "measurement", investigation here, are correlated.
I cannot see a loss of causality neither locality. Because the Boxes had a causal and local connection previously.
Wouldn't it be the same in the quantum world? In the system's perspective there is no superposition, but the superposition is only our mathematical description in order to define all eventualities.
Isn't superposition just a statistical concept in order to include all eventualities? But this doesn't mean that the physically the states are really in a superposition. Am I wrong?
The "spooky interaction at distance" is not spooky if the two entities have had interaction before separation. Logically the outcomes of investigations are correlated.
Where's my error? Why am I not baffled by quantum entanglement? Why do I think "so what"?
I feel somehow like the author of this paper:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9805074.pdf
Kind regards!
Last edited: