Quantum Entanglement inside & outside Event Horizon

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of quantum entanglement in relation to particles located inside and outside the event horizon of a black hole. Participants explore theoretical implications and challenges of measuring entanglement in such a scenario, touching on concepts from quantum mechanics and general relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that entangled particles can exist on either side of the event horizon, but measuring their entanglement from outside the horizon is impossible due to the inability to exchange information.
  • Others argue that an observer inside the event horizon could verify entanglement by measuring the inside particle after measuring the outside one, although this would lead to their demise.
  • A few participants humorously suggest the impracticality of conducting experiments or publishing results from within a black hole, highlighting the challenges posed by spaghettification and tidal forces.
  • Some participants mention the need for a large black hole to allow for any meaningful peer review or publication process before being affected by extreme gravitational forces.
  • There are speculative comments about using superluminal neutrinos to send information out of the black hole, indicating a playful exploration of theoretical possibilities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that entangled particles can exist across the event horizon, but there is no consensus on how to measure or verify this entanglement. The discussion includes competing views and remains unresolved regarding the implications of such scenarios.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on theoretical assumptions about quantum mechanics and general relativity, as well as the unresolved nature of the mathematical implications of measuring entanglement across the event horizon.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring quantum mechanics, black hole physics, and the interplay between quantum entanglement and general relativity.

stglyde
Messages
273
Reaction score
0
It is said nothing can escape the Event Horizon, not even light. How about an entangled pair that is inside the event horizon and outside it. Would they still be entangled such that they still form correlations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
yes, they are entangled, but there's no way to find out whether they are entangled or not based on experiments outside the horizon only; detecting entanglement requires non-local experiments, i.e. measuring both 'particles' and exchanging information regarding the results; this exchange is not possible in the presence of the event horizon, therefore we are not able to learn about the presence of a second particle inside the event horizon and whether the two 'particles' are entangled or not

an idea would be to try to understand this from the perspecive of an observer inside the event horizon; for this observer entanglement should be verifiable / falsifiable b/c he can receive information from the outside
 
Last edited:
tom.stoer said:
yes, they are entangled, but there's no way to find out whether they are entangled or not;
Actually, there is. First measure the outside particle, and then jump into to black hole to measure the inside one. Of course, after the measurement you will crash into the black-hole singularity (or whatever sits in the black-hole center), but at least you will die happy knowing that the horizon does not destroy the correlations.
 
Demystifier said:
Actually, there is. First measure the outside particle, and then jump into to black hole to measure the inside one. Of course, after the measurement you will crash into the black-hole singularity (or whatever sits in the black-hole center), but at least you will die happy knowing that the horizon does not destroy the correlations.

You are right; this is what I mean by

tom.stoer said:
an idea would be to try to understand this from the perspecive of an observer inside the event horizon; for this observer entanglement should be verifiable / falsifiable b/c he can receive information from the outside

I corrected my post above
 
Demystifier said:
Actually, there is. First measure the outside particle, and then jump into to black hole to measure the inside one. Of course, after the measurement you will crash into the black-hole singularity (or whatever sits in the black-hole center), but at least you will die happy knowing that the horizon does not destroy the correlations.
I imagine that the impact factor of the resulting manuscript would be rather low, even if you took some peer-reviewers along with you.
 
DaleSpam said:
I imagine that the impact factor of the resulting manuscript would be rather low, even if you took some peer-reviewers along with you.
In order to get the paper written and peer-reviewed before spaghettification the black hole has to be rather large
 
DaleSpam said:
I imagine that the impact factor of the resulting manuscript would be rather low, even if you took some peer-reviewers along with you.
Unless you use superluminal neutrinos to send information OUT of the black hole. :-p
 
tom.stoer said:
In order to get the paper written and peer-reviewed before spaghettification the black hole has to be rather large
I believe the black hole in the center of our galaxy would be large enough.
 
  • #10
I have to check the formulas for free-fall starting at the event horizon; peer review could be OK but 'publication' becomes rather obscure ;-)
 
  • #11
tom.stoer said:
In order to get the paper written and peer-reviewed before spaghettification the black hole has to be rather large
And even still, I hear the tidal forces inside will tear you apart pretty rapidly.

That said, don't take my word for it, my mate told me. Presumably he went there over the summer or something.EDIT: Wait, they'd probably squish you actually, wouldn't they?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K