Quantum Entanglement for the layman?

In summary: That would be an amazing project.I've already made a loop of the song to play when I got stuck in a measurement problem in the lab. Sort of right stuff for me.In summary, quantum entanglement is a strange phenomenon in which two particles, no matter how far apart they are, still share a connection that allows them to communicate with each other no matter how much distance separates them. It is a very complicated theory, and is not something that can be easily explained to a layman. However, some websites have written summaries that are appropriate for a relative beginner.
  • #1
Tembo441
2
0
Quantum Entanglement... for the layman? !

This may be a tall order, but can anyone explain the basics of quantum entanglement (theory?) in words that a relative layman might have a chance of understanding.

The reason I ask is that although I have a only very basic knowledge of quantum physics, particle physics and relativity, most of what I do understand I can't explain in layman's terms (yes, I know, "if you can't explain it so that the man in the street understands it, then you don't understand it properly either")- and I'm in the middle of editing a sci-fi novel involving (among other things) a development of quantum entanglement into a practical application that also involves a temporal displacement (sort of)... far in the future, obviously...

Anyone like to have a go at putting quantum entanglement in words of not too much more than one syllable? So at least I might end up with a snowflake's chance in Hell (don't start the endothermic/exothermic argument, please) of not getting my author's book published with glaring mistakes that will have serious physicists rolling on the floor laughing. Unknowns are OK for sci-fi, of course, but the "impossible" and the "against the laws of physics" both need additional variables...

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Thanks. Perfect for what I needed. And I understood it, at least to the extent I understood what happens, not why it happens! But there's enough fact there for my author's writing to be not completely unbelievable for the distant future... maybe!

The only problem is... now I want to know more! Not because I need to know, but this is fascinating stuff.

I guess it's all on the Net somewhere; the difficulty is always the separating of the too simplistic Web stuff from the too technical, and finding a happy medium that actually makes sense,

Any other links would be appreciated.
 
  • #4
Hey ... I'm a professional researcher, so finding the right stuff is right up my alley:

This site should keep you busy for a while: http://qubit.physics.ox.ac.uk/
 
  • #5
UltrafastPED said:
Hey ... I'm a professional researcher, so finding the right stuff is right up my alley:

I had a good laugh at that romantic "Quantum Entanglement Tango" in the second link in your first post. Alice and Bob in a tango? :smile:

I've already made a loop of the song to play when I got stuck in a measurement problem in the lab. Sort of right stuff for me.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Tembo441 said:
This may be a tall order, but can anyone explain the basics of quantum entanglement (theory?) in words that a relative layman might have a chance of understanding.

The reason I ask is that although I have a only very basic knowledge of quantum physics, particle physics and relativity, most of what I do understand I can't explain in layman's terms (yes, I know, "if you can't explain it so that the man in the street understands it, then you don't understand it properly either")- and I'm in the middle of editing a sci-fi novel involving (among other things) a development of quantum entanglement into a practical application that also involves a temporal displacement (sort of)... far in the future, obviously...

Anyone like to have a go at putting quantum entanglement in words of not too much more than one syllable? So at least I might end up with a snowflake's chance in Hell (don't start the endothermic/exothermic argument, please) of not getting my author's book published with glaring mistakes that will have serious physicists rolling on the floor laughing. Unknowns are OK for sci-fi, of course, but the "impossible" and the "against the laws of physics" both need additional variables...

Thanks.

Try this post I made quite a while back.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3262928&postcount=5

Moral of the story here is that you can't really understand entanglement without understanding the issue of quantum superposition. And you can't really appreciate the "brouhaha" surrounding what EPR brought up without understanding the classical analog of the same situation.

Zz.
 
  • #7
Duplex said:
I had a good laugh at that romantic "Quantum Entanglement Tango" in the second link in your first post. Alice and Bob in a tango? :smile:

Before someone points it out, the text of the quantum entanglement tango is obviously not correct, it contains several errors. However, I like the idea of ​​music + physics. Rhythms facilitates learning.

I would consider the possibility of an entire musical with Nobel Prize theme with scientifically accurate, but lighthearted lyrics where even children can become interested in science.
 
  • #8
Lay man here too. But got a question on this teleportation jazz. Is it not merely a copy?
 
  • #9
ZapperZ said:
Try this post I made quite a while back.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3262928&postcount=5

Moral of the story here is that you can't really understand entanglement without understanding the issue of quantum superposition. And you can't really appreciate the "brouhaha" surrounding what EPR brought up without understanding the classical analog of the same situation.

Zz.

Is that the locality jazz? You know with that Newton quote about absurdity and all that.
 
  • #11
JayJohn85 said:
Lay man here too. But got a question on this teleportation jazz. Is it not merely a copy?
when the copy is identical to the original, and the original must get destroyed, I'd say 'teleportation' is a pretty good way to describe it. But yeah, maybe it is not exactly the same as what most people think of as 'teleportation'.
 
  • #12
atyy said:
http://quantumtantra.com/bell2.html
http://royalsociety.tv/rsPlayer.aspx?presentationid=26

Cheers for the video will read the article after the video. I got a dumb question due to the John bell diagram...For some reason it screams set theory to me, something which I ain't versed in yet...Has probability been applied alongside set theory or is that a obvious connection I don't know.
 
  • #13
JayJohn85 said:
Lay man here too. But got a question on this teleportation jazz. Is it not merely a copy?

Don't confuse the Star Trek "teleportation" with quantum teleportation. There's no "copy". No object is being created remotely.

JayJohn85 said:
Is that the locality jazz? You know with that Newton quote about absurdity and all that.

No, this is not strictly locality. The superposition principle in QM has more to do with the incompatibility of QM with the concept of classical realism.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1307660&postcount=40

Again, look at the example I gave with the classical scenario, and see why the QM scenario is different.

Zz.
 
  • #14
atyy said:
http://quantumtantra.com/bell2.html
http://royalsociety.tv/rsPlayer.aspx?presentationid=26

I never quite got the reason why the Bells Inequalities ruled out hidden variables. Not least because if there were such things they would be encoded in the wave-function amplitudes rather than the square of them. Why would you try to apply set theory to quantum probabilities which are probabilities of interactions and detections rather than something inherent in the particle?
 
  • #15
Jilang said:
I never quite got the reason why the Bells Inequalities ruled out hidden variables.

That's because it doesn't.
It rules out local realistic hidden variables.
(Strictly speaking it also rules out local realistic non-hidden variables as well, but that's irrelevant because if there were non-hidden variables we'd see them, and we don't so they're already ruled out).
 
  • #16
Nugatory said:
That's because it doesn't.
It rules out local realistic hidden variables.
(Strictly speaking it also rules out local realistic non-hidden variables as well, but that's irrelevant because if there were non-hidden variables we'd see them, and we don't so they're already ruled out).

Thanks for making this distinction, but would the equality hold if you applied it to the amplitudes rather than the squares of them? With the 60 degree spin type type experiment it looks like it would, but I don't know if that would apply generally or not!
 
  • #17
Jilang said:
Thanks for making this distinction, but would the equality hold if you applied it to the amplitudes rather than the squares of them?

I'm not sure why that should matter?
 
  • #18
Because if it holds for the amplitudes and they are interpreted as holding all the information pertaining to the particle there would be no conflict between set theory and QM. It doesn't hold for the squares of the amplitiudes or probabilities which in my understanding are effectively joint probabilities of the particle and detector being in the same place or aligned.
 

1. What is quantum entanglement?

Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon in quantum physics where two or more particles become connected in such a way that the state of one particle can affect the state of the other, even when they are separated by large distances. This connection is not explained by classical physics and is still not fully understood.

2. How does quantum entanglement work?

Quantum entanglement occurs when two particles are created or interact in such a way that their physical properties, such as spin or polarization, become correlated. This means that the state of one particle cannot be described independently of the other, even when they are separated by large distances. Any change in one particle will result in a corresponding change in the other, regardless of the distance between them.

3. What are the potential applications of quantum entanglement?

Quantum entanglement has the potential for various applications, including quantum cryptography for secure communication, quantum computing for faster and more powerful computers, and quantum teleportation for transferring information or quantum states between particles. It also has implications for studying the foundations of quantum mechanics and understanding the nature of reality.

4. Can quantum entanglement be used for instantaneous communication?

No, quantum entanglement cannot be used for instantaneous communication. While changes in one particle do affect the other, this does not allow for the transfer of information at a speed faster than the speed of light. The changes are random and unpredictable, making it impossible to use quantum entanglement for communication.

5. Is quantum entanglement the same as quantum superposition?

No, quantum entanglement and quantum superposition are two different phenomena in quantum mechanics. Quantum superposition refers to the ability of a particle to exist in multiple states simultaneously, while quantum entanglement refers to the correlation between two or more particles. However, both play important roles in understanding quantum mechanics and have potential applications in various fields.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
729
Replies
7
Views
706
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
867
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
800
Replies
276
Views
7K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
7
Views
962
Replies
41
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Back
Top