Is Quantum Entanglement the Key to Instantaneous Communication?

[Quantum_is_Broken]

Hey all! I'm Alexander, after all of the exposure quantum physics is getting in these Marvel movies I decided to study up and I must say Quantum Physics just doesn't set well with me. I'm very interested in what has been made capable due to the math involved with quantum physics. I have a large interest in the dual slit experiment and have some logical explanations for what could be happening. My greatest interest is in Quantum entanglement and the way it is believed that having two possibilities unobserved then observed down the road equals instantaneous communication... I think we are looking at all of this the wrong way and I'd love to discuss it all further. Please feel free to message me, in time I will post about each subject I've mentioned and elaborate on my thoughts.

 

[fresh_42]

Hello and

As you brought it up, I'll have to add that we do not discuss personal theories, or new theories at all unless they have been published in a peer-reviewed renowned scientific journal. So in case this is in conflict to your ambitions, please take the time and read our rules.

If you're willing to learn what is confirmed knowledge, then welcome again!

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

I was just following the steps in the email you send out to new members. Noted though, I will ignore the steps in the email and make sure to read the rules of what is acceptable to discuss lol. Although it seems silly to suppress ideas and pursuit of knowledge when one could easily create a category for that.

 

[fresh_42]

Also may I please get a link to these rules as I can't seem to find them... Something so important should be much more accessible.

Well, first entry under "Info" should be prominent enough:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/physics-forums-global-guidelines.414380/

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

Would it not make sense to start your opening email with a link to those? Or maybe even just put them in the email? Or maybe hide them at the very bottom the forum list in a section within a section. Or maybe post them on the sites navigational bar and title them "Rules". You can't blame a man for poor planning and layout. If you send out an email and say hey! Start with an introduction, that's what you're going to get.

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

Btw to find these I had to go to forums>announcements>guidelines which was number 5 on the list.

 

[fresh_42]

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

Try it on mobile. You get a different result. See this is the problem with Quantum Physics... Y'all can't think outside of the box and always assume because you see it one way that your assumption can't be wrong.

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

You're supposed to be a mentor sir and yet all I see is someone who is to persistent in being "know it all, matter of fact" that I don't see how you could possibly cater to those trying to learn and patch the flaws that greater minds have failed to.

 

[bhobba]

You're supposed to be a mentor sir and yet all I see is someone who is to persistent in being "know it all, matter of fact" that I don't see how you could possibly cater to those trying to learn and patch the flaws that greater minds have failed to.

How do you know QM is broken or has flaws? To me you sound like someone who has some contact with pop-sci level treatments. They unfortunately are at best half truths and sometimes downright wrong.

To understand QM a bit better it would be of value to look at a more modern view of what QM is about:
https://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html

I would also suggest you see a proper treatment rather than popular accounts. Lenaord Susskind has taken on the task to do this, and has produced a book that gives a correct account. But first you should read up on good old classical physics - which the same author has also produced a good book about. Here is a link to both:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465075681/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465062903/?tag=pfamazon01-20

I would also suggest it would be better as a new member to listen rather than approach with a pre-conceived notion there are flaws in QM. It has some issues, but they are probably not what you think, however that is a thread in itself. You are free to start such a thread yourself, but, if you do please listen to the replies.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Mark44]

Y'all can't think outside of the box and always assume because you see it one way that your assumption can't be wrong.

One thing that gets said around here often is that if you don't even know where the box is, it doesn't make much sense to try to think outside it. In your profile, you have "Completed high_school". To be able to understand quantum mechanics at even a very basic level, let alone to pose valid criticism of this field, requires much more than a high school education.

You're supposed to be a mentor sir and yet all I see is someone who is to persistent in being "know it all, matter of fact" that I don't see how you could possibly cater to those trying to learn and patch the flaws that greater minds have failed to.

This site does very well in catering to those who are trying to learn, but the people who are just beginning the learning process are not the ones who are going to "patch the flaws," at least not until they have spent years coming up to speed with the field of QM.

 

[Quantum_is_Broken]

@bhobba, you're not completely incorrect as I did state before my interest in the subject was sparked by the exposure quantum mechanics has seen in popular culture. However, my study of it does delve a tad deeper than that. Obviously there are great gaps in my knowledge though which is why I journeyed to a discussion forum in hopes of talking about some of these gaps to further my knowledge. Quantum_is_Broken is merely a user name and what seems to be on my mind lately, this is not stated as a fact merely an observation for my current point in education on the matter.

I appreciate the reading material and will further my knowledge on the subject via these resources.

@Mark44 My educational level has little value in this discussion, other than a way for you to look down your nose at me which I feel is indeed the case here. I'm sure you can find some pretty astounding accounts of what people are capable of without a college education. For me college had no value, in college I mostly saw a waste of time, money, and emotional stress. Much of what I was able to learn during my 2 years of college was that I didn't need someone to pick sections out of a book for me to read, with proper self application I was able to learn much of the same stuff without an interpreter.

Now that I have a growing interest in QM I shall apply myself in the same way. Quantum is complex to say the least but at the root it will still shape the way we think about things and therefore to me it is philosophical in nature. Thus the problems with Quantum can be solved via thought in an abstract form and them mathematics and experiments can be used to sum up the philosophy of it.

I do not claim to be something I am not, what I am is merely a young man who feels something is missing from the field and I have a deep feeling that I may be able to help given the right direction and help. I'm not here to argue over what I am capable of, my educational background, or arbitrary rules. I am here to learn and debate the realm of possibilities with individuals who are also kept awake at night by the ideas proposed in Quantum theories.

 

[mfb]

and I have a deep feeling that I may be able to help given the right direction and help

Maybe, maybe not. To figure that out you'll first have to learn what is known already. This will require a few years of full-time commitment even for the basics, and a few more years to become an expert.

You wouldn't go to a brain surgeon and tell them they are doing it all wrong and how they should do it instead after reading something about brain surgery in a book. You shouldn't expect that quantum mechanics is any different.

 

[Nugatory]

My educational level has little value in this discussion

Your educational level matters only because a fair amount of math is needed to understand what quantum mechanics is about. You mention having taken two years of college, so that may be enough to get started: A semester of single-variable differential calculus, a semester of single-variable integral calculus, a semester of multi-variable and vector calculus, a semester of elementary differential equations; and then you're ready to start elementary quantum mechanics while doing a semester of linear algebra and another of complex analysis in parallel with the elementary QM course.
While you're picking up that math you'll also need some background from the standard physics curriculum: a semester of classical physics at the level of Kleppner and Kolenkow, a semester of classical E&M, a semester on waves, and abstract classical mechanics at the level of Goldstein (which can be done in parallel with the elementary QM semester). This will also fit into your first two years of college, assuming that you did the single-variable calculus in your last year of high school.
That will get you up to where you can read the papers that were being written in the 1930s and follow along with the developments of the 75+ years since then.

At first this sounds seriously discouraging, but it's not. A few years of hard work to understand and appreciate something built over centuries by some of the smartest people who ever lived? That is a deliriously excitingly good bargain.

From here, it's all on you. You can take the easy route of reading the pop-sci treatments which are written for people who are fascinated by the subject but won't/can't learn the real thing, or you can do the work needed to learn the real thing. It's the difference between looking at a photograph of a delicious meal in a cooking magazine on the one hand; and watching the chef prepare the meal and then sitting down and eating it on the other hand. There's nothing wrong with looking at photographs in cooking magazines, just don't kid yourself that looking at the photograph gives you any insight into how food is prepared or what it tastes like.

 

[Mark44]

@Mark44 My educational level has little value in this discussion, other than a way for you to look down your nose at me which I feel is indeed the case here.

That wasn't my purpose at all. What I wrote was based on what you wrote in your profile.

I'm sure you can find some pretty astounding accounts of what people are capable of without a college education.

Certainly some people have accomplished amazing things without a college degree, but can you name one person who did so in the field of QM?

Much of what I was able to learn during my 2 years of college was that I didn't need someone to pick sections out of a book for me to read, with proper self application I was able to learn much of the same stuff without an interpreter.

Were any of the classes you took physics or mathematics? It's true that a few people can self-study successfully in these disciplines, but the vast majority can't.

 

[PeterDonis]

Thread closed for moderation.