Why Didn't Einstein Apply the Gamma Factor in the EPR Paradox?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the EPR paradox and why Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen did not apply the Lorentz Transformation formula, specifically the Gamma factor, in their thought experiment. Participants explore the implications of light particles traveling at the speed of light and the philosophical consequences of such interpretations within the context of relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the Gamma factor was not applied in the EPR thought experiment, suggesting that if it were, light particles could be considered 'indivisible' and not merely 'entangled'.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of applying a rest frame to light, arguing that it contradicts the principles of relativity, as the speed of light remains constant across inertial reference frames.
  • A third participant asserts that the claim regarding time stopping for light is incorrect, indicating disagreement with the original premise.
  • A later reply states that the original post is based on a fundamental misconception, leading to a closure of the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the application of the Gamma factor and the implications of light traveling at the speed of light. The discussion remains unresolved, with differing views on the validity of the original claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of applying concepts of time and rest frames to light, indicating unresolved assumptions about the nature of light in the context of relativity.

Old Chinaman
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am not a physicist but interested in the decade long debate between Einstein and Niels Bohr, especially in the philosophical implication of the EPR Effect.

I've been wondering if anyone could explain why Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen didn't applied the Lorentz Transformation formula - the Gamma factor for the two complementary light particles that travel in opposite direction at the speed of light when they devised the EPR thought experiment?

When light particles 'travel' at c, gamma factor for time dilation would be infinite which means time stops and those light particles can 'travel' from one end of the Universe to the other in no time. Or they are everywhere at the same time.

If the application of Gamma factor as above is valid, those two complementary particles do not need to communicate to each other. They are not just 'entangled'. They are 'indivisible'. And here Einstein and Bohr would be in the same opinion that Quantum Reality is indivisible.

According Relativity Theory Time and Space are relative. They are so relative, that for a photon that 'travel' at c. time/space simply don't exist. And since speed is a dimension of space/time, at 'the speed of light' there is no 'speed' anymore.

The philosophical implication of this interpretation would be tremendous. It is much worse than turning from Geocentrism to Heliocentrism, that took humanity more than 1800 years to accept.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are implicitly giving a rest frame to light when you talk about time stopping for it. This is self-contradictory in relativity because the speed of light is always the same in inertial reference frames. So in "the rest frame of light", light must be stationary and traveling at c at the same time - which is nonsense. So your approach isn't a valid way to think about anything relativistic, I'm afraid.
 
Old Chinaman said:
When light particles 'travel' at c, gamma factor for time dilation would be infinite which means time stops

No, it doesn't.

Old Chinaman said:
If the application of Gamma factor as above is valid

It isn't.
 
The OP is based on a fundamental misconception. Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad The Lorentz factor gamma and proper time
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
High School New Paradox Discovered, I Think
  • · Replies 98 ·
4
Replies
98
Views
9K
High School Is time an illusion?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Einstein's Twin Paradox: Confusing Solution?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
High School My paraphrased explanation of the Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
High School Is the gamma-factor for Tachyons real?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
High School How does the EPR paradox work?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School How does Einstein's equation work? Why do we need to square c?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Undergrad Bell's spaceship paradox unknown? Interpretation?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does the Twin Paradox Apply to Light and Sound Waves?
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K