The Weird Experiment That Defies Logic

CORRECTION: @3:44 should say 1,200 km, not 12,000 km on-screen

Newsthink is produced and presented by Cindy Pom

Thank you to our Patrons, including:
John & Becki Johnston
Igli Laci

Select images/video supplied by Alamy.

[Newsthink]

*What other videos would you like to see?*
CORRECTION: @3:44 should say 1, 200 km, not 12, 000 km on-screen

[Hoekstes]

Like most things in physics I suspect that there’s a simple explanation for this which we are yet to discover.

[JJs_playground]

How i understand it, when two particles are entangled and you measure one and say, its spin is up then the other particle's spin is down.

[TheMg]

Entanglement is a relationship mediated by conservation law, so no communication between entangled entities is required. It's essentially like the relationship between the momenta of two billiard balls which have interacted. The precise mechanics of quantum entanglement is unknown, but there's no reason to think that there's any sort of "spooky action at a distance" involved.

[SayWhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat]

This is like in development of computer programs.. you have variable... lets call it static variable..and if some part of code changes that variable-it changes in every part of code where it's used.

[JoseLopez-wi]

Just went through a wonderful wormhole love the content ❤

[bxdanny]

I wonder if that "special communication" between twins could actually depend on entanglement between particles in their brains?

[Vengemann]

Please make a biography about Ludwig Boltzmann.. I really want to know about him..

[mr.boomguy]

Personally, I find quantum entanglement incredibly fascinating. The potential it could unlock. My biggest fantasy is that we could use it for Faster Than Light communication, each molecule acting as a bit. That's a lot of data.

And btw, that last thing about the photon-wave. From how I understand it, it's not really both. It's a proverbiality of where the individual photon will land, giving the illusion that it's a wave.
That's what I at least remember, and I could be wrong

[werbnnerf]

Have you actually tested entanglement billions of light years apart? Have you tested it a light year apart? How are you so sure it works instantaneously?

[draculakickyourass]

I would sugest to the people who work in the quantum research to try to study the retro-time effect, maybe the particles exists outside of our space-time dimensions and that causes manipulating a particle, the effect changes the particle along it's all past and future existence, including the moment when it was entangled, affecting the other entangled particles. It's just my dumb opinion, i don't have much knowledge in this domain, I'm not an educated person, i'm just an humble costruction worker.

[Mfields]

doesnt this just show that the “superposition” concept is flawed. Its easy for “quantum entanglement “ to be explained if “superposition” isnt true

[quinktap]

Perceived? Abstract? Have you heard yourself....an Exiton?. Mother of God. Turn yourself off.

[StarDustMoonRocket]

I'll bet he regretted using the word spooky. He was a man of science, not hocus pocus.

[thefrub]

So brilliant is working with the AI slop channels now. Glad I cancelled my subscription

[JenniferNg]

5:51 The Shanghai Maglev train doesn't use superconductors. It uses electromagnets through a Electromagnetic Suspension (EMS) system. The JR Chuo Shinkansen does use superconductors through the Electrodynamic system (EDS).

[wmstuckey]

Using different perspectives as an analogy for different measurements is actually spot on. Suppose Alice measures her particle vertically and the result is "up" (the other possible measurement outcome is "down"). She knows that if Bob measures his entangled-partner particle in the same vertical perspective, he will also find "up" (I'm using the spin triplet state here, as in this video). So, if Bob instead measures his particle in the horizontal perspective, Alice expects his result to be zero, neither "left" nor "right", since there is no side-to-side motion associated with up-and-down motion and Alice knows Bob's particle is vertically "up". Instead, for all the trials when Alice's result is "up", Bob's horizontal measurements produce equal numbers of "left" and "right" outcomes, which only *average* to zero side-to-side. The same obtains for all the trials when Alice's result is "down". So, Alice says Bob's measurements are horrible! His outcomes are as wrong as possible in each and every trial even if they do average to the correct outcome overall.

Bob, feeling insulted, replies, "Wait a minute. I know if Alice had measured her particle horizontally, then she would have gotten "right" when I got "right" and "left" when I got "left", so clearly her particle has no up-and-down motion at all. Therefore, *she* is the one who should be finding a zero result when she measures her particle vertically!" And, sure enough, for all the trials when Bob's result is "right", Alice's vertical measurements produce equal numbers of "up" and "down" outcomes, which only *average* to zero up-and-down. The same obtains for all the trials when Bob's result is "left". So, whose measurements are correct? The relativity principle says everyone's perspectives (reference frames) are equally valid for making measurements, so they're both correct!

This is totally analogous to the situation in special relativity when Alice's perspective (reference frame) differs from Bob's by virtue of their relative motion. In that case, Bob's measurements of Alice's meter sticks clearly show they are smaller than his. But, Alice's measurements of Bob's meter sticks clearly show they are smaller than hers. Again, whose measurements are correct? Again, the relativity principle says their measurements are equally valid, so they're both correct!

See "Einstein's Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit" due out in June 2024 with Oxford UP for the details 🙂

[veronicangatia]

❤❤❤🎉from London uk Veronica ngatia ❤❤❤❤❤

[premiere]

All videos in your channel is very good. I think your way or explaining things make it so easy to understand

[JJs_playground]

Actually the double slit experiment has an explanation. When the particle is getting "observed" (here observed doesn't mean by a human) it uses photons which have high energy this in-turn collapses the wave function of the particle being observed.
And that's why when not observed particles create a wave pattern and when observed act as individual particles.