Is action at a distance possible as envisaged by the EPR Paradox.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the EPR Paradox and the concept of action at a distance, asserting that while entanglement has been experimentally demonstrated, it does not allow for communication or signaling. Participants agree that the phenomenon is random and results from wave function collapse, with no local hidden variables (LHV) involved, as established by Bell's theorem. Various interpretations of quantum mechanics, including Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) and Bohmian mechanics, are debated, highlighting the ongoing uncertainty in understanding quantum entanglement and its implications.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly quantum entanglement.
  • Familiarity with Bell's theorem and its implications regarding local hidden variables.
  • Knowledge of various interpretations of quantum mechanics, including Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) and de Broglie-Bohm theory.
  • Basic grasp of wave function collapse and its role in quantum measurements.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Bell's theorem on local hidden variable theories.
  • Explore the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) and its critiques in quantum mechanics.
  • Study the de Broglie-Bohm theory and its stance on non-local hidden variables.
  • Investigate experimental setups for Bell tests and their significance in quantum physics.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of quantum entanglement and the EPR Paradox.

  • #1,501
DevilsAvocado said:
You’re welcome naturale. I’ll check out 'your' paper ASAP.

I bet that you will be strongly impressed if you try to really understand it carefully. My recommendation is to first read it focalizing your attention on the formal demonstrations (energy quantization, relativistic causality, path integral, commutation relation, ...). Once that you have checked its formal consistence you can finally try to figure out the conceptual implications (the notion of time, determinism, ...).

If you want to discuss about that paper you can use https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=424579".

bests
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #1,502
Great, thanks for info and the link naturale!

Cheers! :wink:
 
  • #1,503
More on EACP elsewhere in the Forum: the fact that the EACP is amost obvioulsy true is PRECISELY what makes it such a good hypothsis (if one can prove anything with it): in paticular, it allows to disqualify locality, something that Hawking takes as granted in the above quote, but that Penrose (less known from the public, but better (or equally) appreciated by the experts) takes as false. Bell "only" proved:
"locality and realism" (or "locality and HVs") false. Now Hawking views on Einstein's view are personal: he is a great scientist, not an historian. See Fine and Jammer for more documented opinions.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad EPR in Bohm formulation
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
High School How does the EPR paradox work?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Could an experiment confirm the EPR paradox's implications on uncertainty?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Undergrad What Is the Meaning of Simultaneous Reality in the EPR Paradox?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Explanation of the EPR paradox
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Undergrad The information paradox and non-locality, ER = EPR
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Undergrad Imagining the EPR paradox/quantum entanglement
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Graduate Bohr's solution to the EPR paradox
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
11K
Insights How Does the EPR-Paradox Relate to Entanglement and Nonlocality?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
High School Why do photon polarization experiments show similar outcomes in different situations?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K