B Entanglement and pair-production and annihilation

HAYAO
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
379
Reaction score
238
I am confused about entanglement, but I am not a physicist. The concept sounds cool and I want to understand in a way so that it is familiar with what I already know. I want to know if I am interpreting this right:

1) If we have a photon that produces a pair of electron and positron, the electron and the positron is spin entangled after the production. The total spin of the produced pair of particles are the same as the spin of the photon due to spin-conservation.

2) Likewise, if we have a spin-entangled electron and positron with a particular total spin, and is annihilated, it will produce a photon of the same spin.

3) If we have non-entangled electron and positron, then a photon will be produced with a spin of statistical probability depending on the spin of electron and positron before annihilation.

Is any, or all of them wrong?

Also, how are entanglement interpreted in the community of physics? For example, if we have an entangled electron-positron pair, is there some sort of interaction intermediate linking the electron and the positron when one of them is measured for z-projection of the spin so that it automatically determines the z-projection of the spin of the other particle? Or do they have rather agnostic view of how the two particles are entangled ("don't know how but it does" attitude)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
HAYAO said:
I am confused about entanglement, but I am not a physicist. The concept sounds cool and I want to understand in a way so that it is familiar with what I already know. I want to know if I am interpreting this right:

1) If we have a photon that produces a pair of electron and positron, the electron and the positron is spin entangled after the production. The total spin of the produced pair of particles are the same as the spin of the photon due to spin-conservation.

2) Likewise, if we have a spin-entangled electron and positron with a particular total spin, and is annihilated, it will produce a photon of the same spin.

3) If we have non-entangled electron and positron, then a photon will be produced with a spin of statistical probability depending on the spin of electron and positron before annihilation.

Is any, or all of them wrong?

Also, how are entanglement interpreted in the community of physics? For example, if we have an entangled electron-positron pair, is there some sort of interaction intermediate linking the electron and the positron when one of them is measured for z-projection of the spin so that it automatically determines the z-projection of the spin of the other particle? Or do they have rather agnostic view of how the two particles are entangled ("don't know how but it does" attitude)?

Note: A single photon will not (on its own) produce an electron-positron pair, and vice versa. 2 in and 2 out conserve.

There are many different views ("interpretations") of entanglement, as no one knows the physical mechanism by which components of an entangled system are connected. Agnostic probably being most common interpretation. :smile:
 
DrChinese said:
Note: A single photon will not (on its own) produce an electron-positron pair, and vice versa. 2 in and 2 out conserve.
I assume you are talking about nucleus. Am I right?

There are many different views ("interpretations") of entanglement, as no one knows the physical mechanism by which components of an entangled system are connected. Agnostic probably being most common interpretation. :smile:
Thank you, DrChinese. I got it.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top