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

B EPR Paradox and Gamma factor

  1. Feb 5, 2017 #1
    I am not a physicist but interested in the decade long debate between Einstein and Niels Bohr, especially in the philosophical implication of the EPR Effect.

    I've been wondering if anyone could explain why Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen didn't applied the Lorentz Transformation formula - the Gamma factor for the two complementary light particles that travel in opposite direction at the speed of light when they devised the EPR thought experiment?

    When light particles 'travel' at c, gamma factor for time dilation would be infinite which means time stops and those light particles can 'travel' from one end of the Universe to the other in no time. Or they are everywhere at the same time.

    If the application of Gamma factor as above is valid, those two complementary particles do not need to communicate to each other. They are not just 'entangled'. They are 'indivisible'. And here Einstein and Bohr would be in the same opinion that Quantum Reality is indivisible.

    According Relativity Theory Time and Space are relative. They are so relative, that for a photon that 'travel' at c. time/space simply don't exist. And since speed is a dimension of space/time, at 'the speed of light' there is no 'speed' anymore.

    The philosophical implication of this interpretation would be tremendous. It is much worse than turning from Geocentrism to Heliocentrism, that took humanity more than 1800 years to accept.
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 5, 2017 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    You are implicitly giving a rest frame to light when you talk about time stopping for it. This is self-contradictory in relativity because the speed of light is always the same in inertial reference frames. So in "the rest frame of light", light must be stationary and travelling at c at the same time - which is nonsense. So your approach isn't a valid way to think about anything relativistic, I'm afraid.
  4. Feb 5, 2017 #3


    Staff: Mentor

    No, it doesn't.

    It isn't.
  5. Feb 5, 2017 #4


    Staff: Mentor

    The OP is based on a fundamental misconception. Thread closed.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Discussions: EPR Paradox and Gamma factor
  1. Gamma factor equation (Replies: 4)