Are entanglements the most fundamental existences in the universe?

[AustinM]

Is entanglement a fundamental constant? That is, can a particle with a spin in one direction exist, without being paired by entanglement with some other similar particle with a spin in the opposite direction, somewhere in the universe -- so that the net spin of all such entangled pairs always equals zero? That is, if one adds up all the spins in opposite directions for a given type of subatomic particle, is the sum of the spins always zero? That is, if a pair of particles A and B are entangled, can they decohere *unless* particle A decoheres with particle B by entangling itself with some other particle C somewhere, while particle B similarly decoheres with particle A by entangling itself with some other particle D somewhere?

 

[DrChinese]

Welcome to PhysicsForums, AustinM!

That is a very good question. I don't know the answer, because it is possible that there is entanglement at work that we are not aware of in a system (a system being some set of particles). There is plenty of evidence that would support the idea that a system of remote particles might be entangled in non-obvious ways. Certainly, the underlying conservation laws would give some support to that idea too.

Sorry I can't add any more, would anyone else care to chime in?

 

[Demystifier]

That is, can a particle with a spin in one direction exist, without being paired by entanglement with some other similar particle with a spin in the opposite direction, somewhere in the universe -- so that the net spin of all such entangled pairs always equals zero? That is, if one adds up all the spins in opposite directions for a given type of subatomic particle, is the sum of the spins always zero?

According to the most fundamental theory known (quantum field theory), the spin of all particles certainly does not need to be zero.

 

[San K]

Is entanglement a fundamental constant? That is, can a particle with a spin in one direction exist, without being paired by entanglement with some other similar particle with a spin in the opposite direction, somewhere in the universe -- so that the net spin of all such entangled pairs always equals zero? That is, if one adds up all the spins in opposite directions for a given type of subatomic particle, is the sum of the spins always zero? That is, if a pair of particles A and B are entangled, can they decohere *unless* particle A decoheres with particle B by entangling itself with some other particle C somewhere, while particle B similarly decoheres with particle A by entangling itself with some other particle D somewhere?

since momentum has to be conserved...i would guess that you propose is correct to an extent

infact the results of quantum experiments... could be explained by (parts of) the whole apparatus entangling and "de-entangling" with the photons

maybe a new term like "shifting/swapping entanglements" could be used...

 

[Drakkith]

Is entanglement a fundamental constant? That is, can a particle with a spin in one direction exist, without being paired by entanglement with some other similar particle with a spin in the opposite direction, somewhere in the universe -- so that the net spin of all such entangled pairs always equals zero? That is, if one adds up all the spins in opposite directions for a given type of subatomic particle, is the sum of the spins always zero? That is, if a pair of particles A and B are entangled, can they decohere *unless* particle A decoheres with particle B by entangling itself with some other particle C somewhere, while particle B similarly decoheres with particle A by entangling itself with some other particle D somewhere?

If a photon is emitted by itself, why would it be entangled with another photon? And if two entangled photons are emitted and one gets absorbed, then the other one has no partner anymore, correct?