Simultaneous Entanglement of Particles: Frame of Reference Considerations

  • Thread starter Thread starter idea2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
idea2000
Messages
99
Reaction score
2
Hi,

If we say that two particles that are entangled can pick their states simultaneously, with respect to which frame of reference are the two events considered simultaneous?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
idea2000 said:
Hi,

If we say that two particles that are entangled can pick their states simultaneously...

Why would you say that?

If you know that the socks in a pair have the same color, and you observe one being blue, when exactly the other sock becomes blue too?
 
idea2000 said:
Hi,

If we say that two particles that are entangled can pick their states simultaneously, with respect to which frame of reference are the two events considered simultaneous?

ueit said:
Why would you say that?

If you know that the socks in a pair have the same color, and you observe one being blue, when exactly the other sock becomes blue too?

Both socks become blue when you observe the first one. It does look like you could get a relativistic paradox if the two socks are in distant galaxies. However, the question is irrelevant if you never observe the second sock. So the only interesting question is 'what happens when you observe the second sock?'

When you observe the other sock, then both observations have clear spacetime coordinates, and so you can analyze it in any frame you want.

Now, it can happen that in one frame you appear to observe sock 'A' first, and in another frame you observe sock 'B' first, but, as I see it, the non-causal nature of entanglement means that your experimental results never depend on which sock you observe first (unless you impose a causality through classical means). For example, in the tests of Bell's inequality, it is the difference between the polarization angles that produces the effect, and this difference does not depend on which photon was observed first.
 
Last edited:
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
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
192
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
71
Views
7K
Back
Top