If you ask if it is established that the measurement of one part of an entangled system causes the other part to instantly aquire a state, then no, that is not an established fact. What is established is that distant measurements of entangled systems show a particular strong correlation.but the process happens at the exact same time. Is this correct?
That is one quite recent proposal in theoretical physics, you can search for "ER=EPR" on this forum or on Google. This is definitely not an established fact nor experimentally verified, but it is being discussed and thought about in some theoretical physics groups. ("ER" means "Einstein-Rosen bridge", "EPR" refers to "the Einstein, Rosen, Podolsky paper on entanglement")What about wormholes to explain quantum entanglement?
I apologize if this a stupid question.What is established is that distant measurements of entangled systems show a particular strong correlation.
I can't speak very much about the paper itself, I've just heard about it, and the paper is regrettably far beyond my own knowledge and expertise. But I've read the Nature article.How did the guy prove this?
Maybe not exactly, but good enough to experimentally verify that various quantum systems can be entangled. There have been many, many experiments that demonstrate entanglement during the years.You can't exactly measure entanglement.
It is not a new interpretation of QM.Summary:: Can someone explain the discovery of this new interpretation of qm to a layman? Can someone also explain the implications?