Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A Bells Theory.

  1. Jun 19, 2016 #1
    Hi... New to this forum. Be kind!

    I did not study physics at university, and consider myself an armchair physicist. I am a computer programmer by trade. I first came across Bells inequalities a few years ago, while working with a fello programmer who did have a PHD in physics. Its pretty profound....and I didn't believe it at all. Its impossible! I thought there must be local variables that somehow carry this information, and if I could some how simulate this in program code, using classical means, then I will have 'solved' the problem. So I tried...... And, after putting a few days of effort in, I gave up. I could not make my simulation work, without having immediate communication between the simulated photons in my code, and my friend with the PHD, with smug grin said 'told you so!'

    This was a few years ago.... its always been on my mind since then.

    To summarize what I believe about Bells theorem, Two entangled photons are emitted. One travels to one side of the room where its polarization is measured using calcite crystal set at a certain polarization, with 2 photodetectors. A similar setup is positioned at the other side of the room. Both Quantum theory, and by experimentation say that that correlation of detections will occur at a ration of cos(θ), θ been the difference in angle between the calcite crystals.

    I can see the issue why it wont work without superluminal communication, and my code needed to have such a mechanism built in to 'read' the values of the 'virtual' calcite crystals. But I have never been happy with this answer.

    I think I have another explanation. Which uses only classical physics, but as an armchair physicist Im probably wrong. I am pretty sure I can make a program that will demonstrate this theory.

    I think there is a hidden variable in the photon, that holds its polarization. I think that when the photon hits the calcite crystal, that hidden variable is changed to the angle of the calcite crystal. And I think that the other matching photon will always mirror that changed value. But, this is not spooky action at a distance.

    Instead, its relativity.

    Photons travel at light speed. If they happen to carry a clock with them, if they were born at 12:00, after a minute, it would still read 12:00. After a million years, it would still read 12:00. Time is stopped for the photon. This is really really important. Its not like the photon is emitted , and one plank time later it hits the calcite crystal... from the photons perspective, there is *NO* time between been emitted, and hitting the crystal.

    So, if the calcite crystal changes its polarization, the photon will see it when it is emitted, and so will its entangled twin. At exactly 12:00 the photon pair was emitted, and at exactly 12:00 one of those photons polarizations was set to an angle, and hence the other entangled pair was set to that angle - 90º

    There is no transmission of information, or communication across a distance. Its just relativity making time have no meaning at all for the photons. There is no past, future, current. it is just is.

    Anyhow, for me, this seems a better explanation than superluminal communication and god playing dice. But, just wondered if this idea has been discussed before and what more trained physicists think?

  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 19, 2016 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    First, it is incorrect to say that the photon experiences no time. There is no reference frame in which the photon is at rest, so you can't talk about the passing of time in a frame that would travel with the photon. There are many threads on PhysicsForums discussing that.

    Second, even if that question of time would be correct, the photons are still spatially separated and, for some observer, communication between the two detectors (or the two particles) would have to happen faster than the speed of light, so it does not resolve the issue.

    If you want to learn more about Bell's theorem, check out http://www.drchinese.com/Bells_Theorem.htm. It is the site of a frequent PF collaborator, DrChinese.

    Otherwise, since we do not discuss personal theories on PF, thread closed.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook