EPR Paradox and implications for QM

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the EPR Paradox and its implications for quantum mechanics (QM) and special relativity. Participants explore the nature of entangled photons, the concept of measurement in quantum mechanics, and the potential conflicts between quantum mechanics and relativity.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the EPR Paradox, noting that measuring one photon of an entangled pair allows for the determination of the other photon's properties, despite the latter not having a definite state until measured.
  • Another participant agrees with the description of entanglement but emphasizes that the EPR experiment cannot be used to transmit information faster than light, aligning with the postulates of special relativity.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that faster-than-light (FTL) information transfer is not inherently incompatible with relativity, but rather the combination of FTL, relativity, and causality presents the conflict.
  • One participant reiterates the EPR Paradox and introduces Bell's theorem, arguing that either causality is violated or photons do not exist in a definite state when not measured, suggesting that EPR must be incorrect.
  • Another participant challenges the assumption that measuring one property of a photon allows for certainty about the other photon's hidden state, arguing that local hidden variables do not align with the statistical outcomes predicted by quantum mechanics.
  • This participant asserts that entanglement does not imply that quantum mechanics is wrong, but rather supports its predictions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the EPR Paradox and the interpretation of quantum mechanics. There is no consensus on whether the paradox suggests a flaw in quantum mechanics or if it can be reconciled with relativity.

Contextual Notes

Discussions involve assumptions about the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics, the implications of Bell's theorem, and the interpretation of entangled states. The complexity of these concepts leads to unresolved questions regarding the compatibility of quantum mechanics and relativity.

trv
Messages
74
Reaction score
9
Can somehow confirm that my understanding of the EPR Paradox is correct. Here goes...

Essentially you can entangle two photons, and send them in opposite directions. If we detect one of the photons, we can find out its properties, and since the properties of the two photons are linked, also that of the other photon.

Quantum mechanics says the photon we didn't measure does not even have a certain state, and so we shouldn't be able to tell anything about it. This would suggest quantum mechanics is wrong.

The argument from the quantum mechanics side is that measuring the first photon causes both photons to take a definite state. This requires information to be transferred from the first photon to the other photon. Now, since, the photons being light, are traveling in opposite directions at the speed of light, we'd need the information to travel faster than the speed of light. This would go against special relativity.

First of all, is the above correct?

Secondly how do we explain the last bit so that it agrees with relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct, assuming that the photons are in some way entangled (for example, they were created in some process by which we know for sure that they must have orthogonal polarizations).

This seems to be in contradiction with special relativity, on of whose postulates is commonly stated as "nothing can travel faster than the speed of light."
However, the exact postulate is " Light in vacuum propagates with the speed c (a fixed constant) in terms of any system of inertial coordinates, regardless of the state of motion of the light source." Basically, that means that information cannot be transmitted faster than a certain speed c.
The resolution of the paradox lies in the fact that you cannot use the EPR experiment to get information from one place to another faster than you can send a light signal.
 
Even FTL information transfer is not incompatible with relativity. It is only the combination of FTL, relativity, and causality that is incompatible. You can have any two of the three, and right now it looks like causality and relativity.
 
trv said:
Can somehow confirm that my understanding of the EPR Paradox is correct. Here goes...

Essentially you can entangle two photons, and send them in opposite directions. If we detect one of the photons, we can find out its properties, and since the properties of the two photons are linked, also that of the other photon.

Quantum mechanics says the photon we didn't measure does not even have a certain state, and so we shouldn't be able to tell anything about it. This would suggest quantum mechanics is wrong.

The argument from the quantum mechanics side is that measuring the first photon causes both photons to take a definite state. This requires information to be transferred from the first photon to the other photon. Now, since, the photons being light, are traveling in opposite directions at the speed of light, we'd need the information to travel faster than the speed of light. This would go against special relativity.

First of all, is the above correct?

Secondly how do we explain the last bit so that it agrees with relativity?

As I understand it, Bell's theorem which was verified by experiment, admits only 2 possibilities. Either causality is violated or photons do not exist in a definite state when not being measured. QM agrees with Bell's findings even though his findings do not depend on the correctness of QM. EPR which requires causality AND a definite state for photons has to be wrong.
 
trv said:
Essentially you can entangle two photons, and send them in opposite directions. If we detect one of the photons, we can find out its properties, and since the properties of the two photons are linked, also that of the other photon.
No, you can only assume that if you measure the same property of the other particle, the result of the first particle's measurement allows you to predict with certainty the result of the second particle's measurement. However, you cannot assume that if you measure a different property of the second particle, then the second particle's "hidden" value for the property you measured on the first property was still the same even though you didn't measure it. This would be a "local hidden variables" explanation for the correlation that's seen when you measure the same property, but it's inconsistent with the statistics seen when you measure different properties. Please see my post #2 on this thread for an analogy involving lotto cards that I like to use to explain this.
trv said:
Quantum mechanics says the photon we didn't measure does not even have a certain state, and so we shouldn't be able to tell anything about it. This would suggest quantum mechanics is wrong.
No, the idea that the particle did have a certain state even if you didn't measure it corresponds to a "local hidden variables" picture, and the results of QM show that such a picture doesn't actually work. Entanglement certainly doesn't suggest quantum mechanics is wrong, it's exactly what QM predicts!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
974
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
595
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 98 ·
4
Replies
98
Views
9K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K