No need for spooky action at a distance

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Suppaman
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
31 replies · 6K views
Neandethal00 said:
But has anyone so far tried to connect quantum entanglement with Higgs Boson?
If Higgs field/boson (if it exists) is everywhere, it may have an effect on entanglement.

Funny, quantum entanglement is not obviously everywhere - only SOME particles are entangled in a way which can be observed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Neandethal00 said:
OP's idea may not be too far-fetched. Thanks for the links, Bohm, but where is Figure 1?

Figure from linked paper is attached below. I took the OP's argument to be similar to this argument/analogy by that author?
John Bell put forward the locality hypothesis based on the entity consisting of two spin-1/2 particles in the singlet spin state introduced by David Bohm as an example of the Einstein Podolsky Rosen situation. Why do most scientists seem to find this locality hypothesis `natural' for this entity? Because they imagine the entity to be an entity consisting of two spin-1/2 particles located in different and widely separated regions of space and flying in opposite directions. And indeed, for two entities located in widely separated regions of space, with no connection between them, the Bell locality hypothesis is a natural hypothesis to be satisfied. But for two entities that actually form a whole, like the water in the two vessels, it is very easy to violate the Bell locality hypothesis, and hence also the Bell inequalities.
A Potentiality and conceptuality interpretation of Quantum mechanics
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.3767.pdf
 

Attachments

Last edited: