- #1
thenewmans
- 168
- 1
How is it that the lack of any info transferred between 2 entangled particles means that SR and Entanglement are not in conflict? I guess what I’m really asking is, well, it sounds to me like the lack of info is really just a lack of evidence that anything is transferred instantaneously. So if there’s no evidence that anything transfers instantaneously then you’re not breaking the locality rule of SR. So that leaves 2 choices. Either the 2 particles influence each other through some sublight path backward through time (which probably defies SR in some other way) or the influence occurs instantaneously, which does break locality and does defy SR.
And even if the influence does occur instantaneously, who’s to say which particle was examined first? What I mean is that each particle is outside the lightcone of the other particle, right? So the decision of which particle was examined first really depends on your inertial frame of reference. I mean there’s always some inertial frame which sees the events occur in the opposite order from you. To say the corollary, if all inertial frames agree on the order of events, then one particle must be inside the other particle's lightcone.
Aaaa! My noodle is so totally done cooking right now.
And even if the influence does occur instantaneously, who’s to say which particle was examined first? What I mean is that each particle is outside the lightcone of the other particle, right? So the decision of which particle was examined first really depends on your inertial frame of reference. I mean there’s always some inertial frame which sees the events occur in the opposite order from you. To say the corollary, if all inertial frames agree on the order of events, then one particle must be inside the other particle's lightcone.
Aaaa! My noodle is so totally done cooking right now.