Entanglement correlations, singlet spin state

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the measurement process of a pair of electrons in a singlet spin state, particularly focusing on the implications of Alice's measurement of one electron's spin and how it affects the state of the other electron. Participants explore the mathematical operators involved, the nature of state collapse, and the correlations expected between the measurements of the two particles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why measuring Alice's electron spin up leads to the state collapsing to a specific configuration, suggesting that other eigenstates could also be possible.
  • Others propose that the measurement should be viewed as a projection onto a subspace defined by the eigenstates of the measurement operator, which may not include all potential eigenstates of the system.
  • One participant argues that the overall wavefunction must remain antisymmetric due to the fermionic nature of the electrons, limiting the possible configurations to (up, down) and (down, up).
  • Another viewpoint suggests that the measurement process only allows for the projection of states that were present in the initial superposition, thus excluding configurations like (up, up) or (down, down).
  • There is a discussion about the hermiticity of the measurement operator and its implications for the collapse of the state, with some questioning whether the operator used is appropriate.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of Alice's measurement and the nature of state collapse. No consensus is reached regarding the justification for the specific outcomes of the measurements or the nature of the operators involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of the measurement process, including assumptions about the operators and the nature of the states involved. The discussion reflects uncertainty about how measurement affects the system and the implications of the singlet state.

  • #31
zonde said:
For two electrons to be entangled they have to originate from single place and then move to two different places by unitary evolution. So it's preservation of wave function under unitary evolution that is required as well.

I'm not sure what makes you say that ... electrons in a singlet state are always entangled, right? In fact, in atomic and molecular systems, aren't *all* of the electrons entangled with each other under normal circumstances? This entanglement appears as the exchange integral in electronic structure calculations, for example, which needs to be handled properly to get results that agree with experiment.

I guess what you were saying above applies to macroscopic entanglement experiments
like Aspect etc., but I don't think it is generally correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
SpectraCat said:
I'm not sure what makes you say that ... electrons in a singlet state are always entangled, right? In fact, in atomic and molecular systems, aren't *all* of the electrons entangled with each other under normal circumstances? This entanglement appears as the exchange integral in electronic structure calculations, for example, which needs to be handled properly to get results that agree with experiment.

I guess what you were saying above applies to macroscopic entanglement experiments
like Aspect etc., but I don't think it is generally correct.
I do not quite understand what are your objections.
Entangled particles do not appear from nowhere at two remote places. There has to be some preparation procedure (source) of entangled pair in experiment, right?
 
  • #33
zonde: regarding the pauli exclusion principle thing, what i am saying is that i don't think the pauli explusion principle is something you should have to explicitly apply when doing analysis, it should be automatic, a consequence of the more basic rules for constructing wave functions. see, for example p204 of Griffths "Intro to QM, 2nd Ed"
 
  • #34
zonde said:
I do not quite understand what are your objections.
Entangled particles do not appear from nowhere at two remote places. There has to be some preparation procedure (source) of entangled pair in experiment, right?

Yes, I agree. My only concern was with the apparent generality of your statement:
For two electrons to be entangled they have to originate from single place and then move to two different places by unitary evolution. So it's preservation of wave function under unitary evolution that is required as well.

My point is that your statement applies to macroscopically entangled particles generated in laboratory experiments. Quantum entanglement is a much more general physical phenomenon.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K