Entanglement Between Different Types of Particles?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LarryS
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Entanglement Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of quantum entanglement, specifically whether entanglement can occur between different types of particles, such as electrons and protons, or if it is restricted to identical particles. The conversation explores theoretical implications and mathematical frameworks related to entanglement.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that entanglement can only exist between particles of the same type, suggesting that their Hilbert spaces must be compatible and of the same dimension.
  • Others argue that while all entanglement experiments have involved identical particles, it is theoretically possible to entangle parameters of different particles, such as the spins of an electron and a proton.
  • A participant mentions that positrons and electrons are often discussed in the context of entanglement gedankenexperiments, highlighting a distinction between identical particles and the concept of entanglement related to indistinguishability.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of "compatible" Hilbert spaces, explaining that composite quantum systems can be described by tensor products of Hilbert spaces of different dimensions, and that entangled states do not require the particles to reside in the same Hilbert space.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether entanglement can occur between different types of particles, with no consensus reached on the matter. Some maintain that entanglement is limited to identical particles, while others suggest that different types of particles can also be entangled under certain conditions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the compatibility of Hilbert spaces and the mathematical representation of entangled states, which remain unresolved. The implications of indistinguishability in quantum mechanics are also noted but not fully explored.

LarryS
Gold Member
Messages
361
Reaction score
34
From what I have read so far, it seems as though entanglement can only exist between particles of the same type (2 photons, 2 electrons, etc.) - that their Hilbert spaces must be compatible and of the same dimension.

Is that correct?

As always, thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All entanglement experiments were performed with identical particles. But you may (theoretically) entangle parameters of different particles. I see no reason why, e.g., spins of electron and proton should not be entangled.
 
And I think positrons/electrons are a common topic for entanglement gedankenexperiments, like the Greene version of the EPR paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox). In a way its cleaner-- identical particles exhibit a second form of "entanglement" that has to do with their indistinguishability, gives us the Pauli exclusion principle (for fermions), and is a bit different from what people usually mean by quantum entanglement.
 
referframe said:
From what I have read so far, it seems as though entanglement can only exist between particles of the same type (2 photons, 2 electrons, etc.) - that their Hilbert spaces must be compatible and of the same dimension.
What do you mean by "compatible" Hilbert spaces? Mathematically, a composite quantum system with Hilbert spaces H1 and H2 is described by the tensor product H1⊗H2 which does not require the spaces to be of the same dimension. For example, the spatial Hilbert space of a free electron has the dimension infinity while its spin Hilbert space has the dimension 2.

Entangled two-particle-states typically look like |a1>⊗|b1> + |a2>⊗|b2>. The important property here is that when particle a is in state |a1>, particle b is in state |b1> with certainty. Not that the states |a> and |b> live in the same Hilbert space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K