Why Does Quantum Entanglement Seem Puzzling Compared to Everyday Correlations?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter leonid.ge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Entangled parts
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the puzzling nature of quantum entanglement compared to classical correlations, particularly using the analogy of coins. Participants explore the differences in behavior between classical objects like coins and quantum particles like electrons, focusing on the implications of these differences for understanding entanglement.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a thought experiment involving coins to illustrate how classical correlations are perceived as non-puzzling compared to quantum correlations.
  • Another participant notes that correlations from coins do not violate Bell inequalities, while those from entangled particles do, highlighting a fundamental difference.
  • A participant explains that coins and electrons behave differently under the laws of physics, with coins adhering to Newtonian mechanics and electrons following quantum mechanics, including principles like the uncertainty principle.
  • It is suggested that the statistical nature of correlations in entangled particles differs from classical correlations, referencing John Bell's work and its experimental confirmations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on why entangled particles are perceived as strange compared to classical objects. While some agree on the fundamental differences in behavior, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these differences.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention concepts such as Bell's theorem and the nature of quantum measurements, but the discussion does not resolve the complexities or assumptions underlying these ideas.

leonid.ge
Messages
17
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
Why coins are different from particles?
Suppose someone throws coins and once they fall on heads or tails, she saws them along the middle on two parts: one pointing towards the ground and the other pointing from the ground. Then she sends those two parts into opposite directions so after some time they reach two distant planets, one inhabited by Bob and the other with Alice who measure what they've got. So the results that Alice and Bob get will correlate, even though the planets are very far apart, and this does not seem strange to anyone. So why correlation for entangled particles looks strange to people and for coins not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Any correlations you can produce with coins cannot violate the Bell inequalities. Correlations you can produce with entangled particles can. That's the difference.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, PeroK, Hornbein and 1 other person
leonid.ge said:
TL;DR Summary: Why coins are different from particles?
Coins and electrons behave fundamentally differently, not just when it comes to entanglement. A coin can be spinning fast or slow and a precise axis of rotation can be found. This is the case for any maroscopic rigid body.

An electron's spin is manifestly quantized. And the components of spin about different axes are incompatible observables. This means that the electron never has any well-defined axis of rotation.

In short, electrons obey QM, the Schrödinger equation and the uncertainty principle. Whereas, coins obey Newtonian mechanics. Additionally, electrons exhibit quantum entanglement, whereas coins do not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
leonid.ge said:
So why correlation for entangled particles looks strange to people and for coins not?
The correlations for entangled particles are statistically different from those that we find if assign the properties of the particles when the pair is created, no matter how we do it. In the middle of the last century John Bell proved that any theory that works the way you're thinking must disagree with the quantum mechanical prediction for entangled particles - and since then we've done the experiments that conform that QM is correct,

You will want to google for "Bertlmann's socks" and "Bell's theorem", and pay particular attention to the web page maintained by our own @DrChinese
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrChinese

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
7K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K