What other experimental evidence exists for entanglement?

gespex
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I know "quantum entanglement" is real, in some sense. I know that if we entangle two particles their spin, for instance, is closely related. Especially spin entanglement has enough evidence, yet it is also easy to explain using a hidden variable.
Hence I wonder: what other experimental evidence is there for entanglement? Which properties have been shown to be entangled, and in what way?


Thanks in advance,
Gespex
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gespex said:
Hello all,

I know "quantum entanglement" is real, in some sense. I know that if we entangle two particles their spin, for instance, is closely related. Especially spin entanglement has enough evidence, yet it is also easy to explain using a hidden variable.
Hence I wonder: what other experimental evidence is there for entanglement? Which properties have been shown to be entangled, and in what way?


Thanks in advance,
Gespex

Once you read Bell's Theorem, I would hope you would revise your comment about "easy to explain using a hidden variable". A non-local hidden variable is theoretically feasible, but not with local ones. Are you familiar with Bell?

As to things that can be entangled: there are many things which have been experimentally entangled besides photons. I don't keep track of them specifically, but you can get an idea of papers published this year by scanning some of these:

http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/abs:+AND+entanglement+experiment/0/1/0/2011/0/1?per_page=100

Here is an older paper you may like:

Hyper-entanglement (more than just spin):
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0406148
 
Thank you for your answer. I'm not saying it is easy to introduce a local variable theorem for all of entanglement, only for the entanglement of spin.

I wasn't asking about what kind of particles have been entangled, I know it's not about the particles. But rather, which properties of particles have been tested to be entangled and in what way this test was done.
The only one I am aware of is spin, where the test is "up-spin" or "down-spin" for two distinct axis. But I know others have been tested as well, I just don't know of any such experiments.

I will read the links you posted now.


Thanks
 
gespex said:
Thank you for your answer. I'm not saying it is easy to introduce a local variable theorem for all of entanglement, only for the entanglement of spin...

Bell's Theorem shows that is not possible. See below for a proof (from my website, and I will be glad to answer any questions).

Bell's Theorem with Easy Math
 
DrChinese said:
Bell's Theorem shows that is not possible. See below for a proof (from my website, and I will be glad to answer any questions).

Bell's Theorem with Easy Math

Hmm very interesting link... Maybe I was wrong, but I'm going to have to let it sink in a bit more.

Thanks for your replies!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top