Murray Gell-Mann on Entanglement

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Thecla
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Entanglement
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Murray Gell-Mann asserts that measuring one photon does not affect the other in an entangled pair, a statement that has sparked debate among physicists. While many agree with Gell-Mann's interpretation, the discussion highlights the complexities of quantum mechanics, particularly regarding non-locality and the collapse of the wave function. The conversation emphasizes that interpretations of entanglement are varied and often depend on individual perspectives on quantum theory, particularly in relation to relativistic quantum field theory (QFT) and hidden variables.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with Quantum Entanglement concepts
  • Knowledge of Relativistic Quantum Field Theory (QFT)
  • Awareness of Bell's Theorem and its implications
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of Bell's Theorem in quantum mechanics
  • Study the concept of wave function collapse in quantum systems
  • Investigate different interpretations of quantum mechanics, including hidden variable theories
  • Learn about decoherent histories and their role in quantum theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in the foundations of quantum theory and the philosophical implications of entanglement and measurement.

  • #421
stevendaryl said:
There is another big difference with diffusion, and that is that diffusion is a matter of some substance spreading out in physical space, while a wave function propagates in configuration space. The difference isn't apparent when you're talking about a single particle, but becomes important when you are talking about multiple particles. For two particles, the wave function is a function of 6 variables: \psi(x_1, y_1, z_1, x_2, y_2, z_2) where (x_1, y_1, z_1) refers to the location of the first particle, and (x_2, y_2, z_2) refers to the location of the second particle. Because it's a function of configuration space, there is no meaning to "the value of the wave function here". So, in spite of the similarity of form, the Schrödinger equation is nothing like a diffusion equation (at least not diffusion through ordinary 3-space).
Good points. I would just point out that even in the multiparticle case it would still make sense to draw an analogy with a random walk. In the latter case we would want to calculate ##P\left(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1},x_{2},y_{2},z_{2}\right )##, i.e. the probability of finding the particles at ##\vec{x}_{1}## and ##\vec{x}_{2}## after the initial system preparation. The Feynman diagrams for two particles would have a natural translation into a random walk analysis for two classical particles.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #422
MrRobotoToo said:
Good points. I would just point out that even in the multiparticle case it would still make sense to draw an analogy with a random walk. In the latter case we would want to calculate ##P\left(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1},x_{2},y_{2},z_{2}\right )##, i.e. the probability of finding the particles at ##\vec{x}_{1}## and ##\vec{x}_{2}## after the initial system preparation. The Feynman diagrams for two particles would have a natural translation into a random walk analysis for two classical particles.

Right, but in classical probability theory (with no nonlocal interactions), the probabilities for random walks factor for particles that are too far apart to interact. That is, for two particles that are far apart,

P(x_1, y_1, z_1, x_2, y_2, z_2) \approx P(x_1, y_1, z_1) P(x_2, y_2, z_2)

The random walk taken by this particle is independent of the random walk taken by this other particle. If that fails to be the case, then one suspects that there is some unaccounted-for long range interaction or shared state.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K