Could Length Contraction Provide Insights into Quantum Entanglement Paradoxes?

peety
Messages
25
Reaction score
5
Could any of the experts here say whether there could be a clue here as to how to resolve the apparent paradoxes of quantum entanglement? I mean if a distance is reduced to zero, in a photon' s frame, then we should not be surprised that measurements made on one of a pair should be reflected in the corresponding photon. I don't pretend to see this clearly, but I'm curious to hear better informed views.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[Mentor's note - lightly edited as part of moving some posts from one thread to another]
peety said:
Could any of the experts here say whether there could be a clue here as to how to resolve the apparent paradoxes of quantum entanglement? I mean if a distance is reduced to zero, in a photon' s frame, then we should not be surprised that measurements made on one of a pair should be reflected in the corresponding photon. I don't pretend to see this clearly, but I'm curious to hear better informed views.
IIt has nothing to do with the subject matter here. There is no such thing as a photon's frame and distance is never reduced to zero, so the question does not apply in any case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
peety said:
I mean if a distance is reduced to zero, in a photon' s frame, then
When we say "X''s frame" we mean a frame in which X is at rest. There is no such frame possible for light. Also, when you start to talk about anything in the realm of quantum physics it's essential to understand that quantum particles don't have trajectories in the usual sense of the word.
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
The Poynting vector is a definition, that is supposed to represent the energy flow at each point. Unfortunately, the only observable effect caused by the Poynting vector is through the energy variation in a volume subject to an energy flux through its surface, that is, the Poynting theorem. As a curl could be added to the Poynting vector without changing the Poynting theorem, it can not be decided by EM only that this should be the actual flow of energy at each point. Feynman, commenting...
Back
Top