Help for a beginner Bell's Theorem

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Bell's Theorem, particularly its implications regarding quantum nonlocality. Participants explore the concept of nonlocality, where entangled particles appear to influence each other instantaneously, and seek resources to better understand these phenomena from a beginner's perspective.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express difficulty in accepting the implications of nonlocality as described by Bell's Theorem.
  • One participant suggests a resource that provides a simple exposition of Bell's Theorem with minimal mathematics.
  • Another participant emphasizes that there is currently no explanation for the "why" of quantum nonlocality, stating that the laws of physics simply exist as they are observed.
  • A participant recommends starting with Wikipedia and branching out to other references, highlighting the observational nature of physics without necessarily understanding the underlying reasons.
  • One participant shares a detailed explanation involving light cones and backward causation, discussing how measurements at entangled particle detectors could influence each other and the implications of time-symmetry in light cones.
  • References to additional readings on backward causation and action at a distance in quantum mechanics are provided for further exploration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the explanations for quantum nonlocality, with multiple competing views and interpretations presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the lack of consensus on the underlying reasons for quantum nonlocality and the dependence on specific definitions and interpretations of quantum mechanics concepts.

asb84
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Help for a beginner...Bell's Theorem

Hi guys, I'm definitely a beginner when it comes to quantum mechanics but I've recently been reading about Bell's Theorem and have become intrigued by its implications, specifically the nonlocality principle where electrons seem to be able to communicate with each other simultaneously. I understand the results of the expiriment but it is driving me crazy because it is just so hard to accept that this could be true. Do you know of any resource that describes the possible explanations of nonlocality in layman's terms (i.e. something a beginner could possible understand)? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try http://quantumtantra.com/bell2.html. I think it's one of the simplest expositions of Bell's theorem and proof, and it involves little to no math.
 


asb84 said:
Hi guys, I'm definitely a beginner when it comes to quantum mechanics but I've recently been reading about Bell's Theorem and have become intrigued by its implications, specifically the nonlocality principle where electrons seem to be able to communicate with each other simultaneously. I understand the results of the expiriment but it is driving me crazy because it is just so hard to accept that this could be true. Do you know of any resource that describes the possible explanations of nonlocality in layman's terms (i.e. something a beginner could possible understand)? Thanks!

Welcome to PhysicsForums, asb84!

There is no current explanation of the WHY of quantum non-locality, if that is your question. The laws of physics just "are". Is there a specific question you have?
 


start with wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance_(physics )

and then branch out to other references

DrChinese is right there is no why/ we observe an interesting event and attempt to model it in math. if successful we have the beginnings of a theory then we study the math under different circumstances and try to make predictions that can be tested (we still don't know why only what we see in the math) and if it checks out then we have a theory.

from the poetry corner:
I do the math,
I touch the sky,
I can see how,
I just don't know why.
-- jmm 2012
 
Last edited by a moderator:


asb84 said:
Hi guys, I'm definitely a beginner when it comes to quantum mechanics but I've recently been reading about Bell's Theorem and have become intrigued by its implications, specifically the nonlocality principle where electrons seem to be able to communicate with each other simultaneously. I understand the results of the expiriment but it is driving me crazy because it is just so hard to accept that this could be true. Do you know of any resource that describes the possible explanations of nonlocality in layman's terms (i.e. something a beginner could possible understand)? Thanks!

Welcome to physicsforums!

Here is a thread on Bell's theorem with easy explanations: Bell's Theorem - Easy explained

For nonlocality I recommend reading this post on the Backreaction blog: Nonlocal correlations between the Canary Islands
It assumes though that you know about Minkowski diagrams and light cones.

Once you have understood the concept of a light cone consider the following situation (see attachment, but rightclick on it and open it in a new tab):
You have two detectors A and B and each of them measures a particle of the entangled pair.
M(A) and M(B) denote the measurements at A and B.
When a measurement takes place we suppose a signal of the outcome is emitted. For example if you measure spin-up at detector A a signal is emitted at M(A) (see forward light cone).
This signal could reach the other particle flying to B and influence it, i.e. it tells the second particle to have spin-down, provided that M(B) lies in the forward light cone of M(A).

To prevent this we put M(B) outside of M(A)'s light cone, i.e. the measurement M(B) takes place before the signal can reach the particle flying to B. So, there is no way M(A) can have an influence on M(B).

However, let's assume that the light cone is time-symmetric, i.e. the light cone also moves backward in time. We call this the backward light cone (see attachment). This backward light cone reaches the source at t=0 which means that it could have influenced the particle flying to B and told it to have spin-down. This is known as backward causation. (I have read about it in the paper Bell's inequality and 'ghost-like action-at-a-distance' in quantum mechanics by Richard D Mattuck.)

You can read about it here:

1. Backward Causation (Plato Stanford).
Read the section that starts with "Costa de Beauregard".

2. Action at a Distance in Quantum Mechanics (Plato Stanford)
See Figure 3.

The idea of a backward light cone looks good in the drawing but it has a problem. It means that a future event can influence the past.
 

Attachments

  • backward_causation.png
    backward_causation.png
    13.7 KB · Views: 521
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 220 ·
8
Replies
220
Views
23K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
8K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
12K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 565 ·
19
Replies
565
Views
66K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K