Entanglement :: Spooky Action At A Distance Really Isn't Action At A Distance.

[davidepcell]

After some thought and investigation, I am proposing that "Spooky action at a distance" really isn't action at a distance. In fact, it isn't even action.

 

Here's what I propose is really happening...

Suppose you have a factory that creates widgets. The assembly line creates widgets of 2 types. A and B.

Unfortunately, things are a bit sloppy at this factory,

and there is NO way to control whether you get type A or type B on any given "lot" of widgets made that "day".

 

But things aren't so sloppy that you get some A's and some B's. In the lot you produce that "day",

you only get all A or all B, but you don't know which.

 

And the factory puts them in the box and ships them all over the universe.

Now... you get hold of one of the boxed widgets and open it up and "look" inside. And you learn that you got an "A".

You can conclude then, that all of the other widgets produced in that "lot" were also type A. It's guaranteed 100%.

 

So, there was no action, nothing really changed to any of the "widgets" in the "boxes" that were sent all over the "universe".

They are the same now as they were when they left the factory.

But now that you opened one of the boxes, you know what type were shipped in the "lot" that was made that "day".

 

And that, is your so-called "spooky action at a distance" baloney.

Edited October 27, 2017 by davidepcell

[Shustaire]

I agree, it isn't action neither does it involve any exchange of information. A good statistical book in the first three chapters reveals the statistical nature behind the terminology.

[sanctus]

But what about if you change the widget to type B when you opened it and originally had a type A? Entanglement says that your change is reflected to all other boxes in the universe; this is why it is said "spooky action at distance".

Information is not transmitted, but this for another reason. In real experiments, the entangled particles have opposite spins and if you change spin of one the other flips to. But to use this for information transmission you need first to know along which axis to measure the spin and this is not possible to know  at >c.

[Shustaire]

If I have two bags with two different objects. I have a probability of finding one or the other. Google each term on a Bells experiment paper.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_function.

 

Now think about the detectors. We are measuring the statistics that our polarity of particles matches the alignment of the detector.

 

Then recognize that entangled particles are correlated in the past upon creation to conform to conservation laws.

 

Is any action or communication needed?

[sanctus]

Shustaire, not sure I get your point (mainly after the link), care to alaborate?

[Shustaire]

Look specifically at the nature of the formulas involved. There is a huge difference between a probability wavefunction and the wavefunctions specifically describing a particle.

 

The probability wavefunctions depends on polarity angles between detectors and the measurement and is also a form of interference. There is a lot more going on that the written descriptives in the research papers.

 

For example there are differences in the probability distributions between CHSH and EPR simply due to different setups and how each define locality and non locality.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Shustaire

[sanctus]

Isn't that exactly why you need to know which angle to measure it in (which I use above as argument but no information will travel at >c)? Because say spin is in y direction and you measure it in x, then you get 50% chance to get it right.

[Shustaire]

Your absolutely right no information does travel greater than c but then no information is being exchanged. Correlation functions in statistics is trends. The two datasets do not require causation. ie A causes B.

 

We are looking specifically at trends between datasets not causation.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Shustaire

[Shustaire]

Checked with hubby, on local vs nonlocal on this experiment.

 

I will just copy/paste his response.

 

" Local is the spacetime radius of causality defined by speed of information exchange, non local is any region outside this causality zone, including any past interactions shared by the particles at the time of entangling. This past event will affect the correlation function in future measurements".

 

In essence the correlation function is already affected by non local to the experiment past events.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Shustaire