>1935+81 >he fell for the entanglement meme You do realize

>>8293586

Its fun to believe in magic though

>>8293586
Could we pretend that this isn't a bait thread because I'm genuinely interested.

Is there some resource that I could look at for an upper-year undergrad physics student which would explain Bell's theorem in detail? I've even looked at the original paper but to be honest I'm too lazy to go through it myself, it's a bit too dense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs

>>8293601
You cannot skip through it and you're not going to get shit until you learn all the math and all the physics involved, so that you can draw your own conclusions independently. Why do slobs irritate me so much?

>>8293586
The reason why Bell's theorem is so profound is because it proves a lot while assuming very little. Its assumptions are very reasonable. The two biggest assumptions are locality and realism. The violations of the inequality must stem from these assumptions; at the very least one of these must be false.

>>8293601
basically the magic is real senpai. The principle of a finite propagation speed for causal influences is false. Time to move on and accept the occult in our physics

>>8293601
>this is obviously a bait thread, OP is obviously wrong

>i actually have no idea tho, lol, give me books plz

moron

OP is right

>>8293607
The quantum eraser is one of the most misunderstood experiments

It's really really sad to see normies trying to grasp the meaning

They come up with all kinds of retarded ideas like the future influencing the past and stuff

When it's just a little trick, related to the coincidence counter, and the fact that two sets of non-interference patterns when mixed will look like two sets of interference patterns

>>8294751
Locality can be saved pretty easily with worm-holes.

>>8294808
>normies
the narrator works at CERN

cern trumps 4chan

>>8294897
If that's true, it's proof that
a) CERN is overrated
or
b) The guy needed some quick bucks and accepted to narrate some pop-sci bull

>>8293586
What about Ringbauer experiment niggu?
https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6213

>>8294906
probably B

>>8294808
You're free to come up with a full causal and realist interpretation, but you'll find you're gonna have something counter-intuitive at some point or another.

>>8294818
At the expense of a pile of conservation laws.

>>8294928
Am I free? That's the standard interpretation.

>two sets of non-interference patterns when mixed will look like two sets of interference patterns

The fact that you need a coincidence counter to do the experiment is all proof needed to discard retrocasuality.

>>8294930
no

>>8294981
I know that the sets are not separable without classical information from the idler photon measurement my man, what I'm asking you is what happens in the cases that correspond to an interference pattern?
Sure they are counted after the fact but why are they no cases where the idler photon show a linear polarization where the signal photon falls outside of the corresponding pattern. What happens to the wave function?

>>8294981
It's not retrocausality, but it does seem to show that superpositions are ontological rather than epistemic. It leaves you with the very odd understanding that future measurements influence the description of the experiment that occurred in the past. The future impacts what story you invoke to describe experiments of the past. It's not retrocausality, but it is in itself a very peculiar result that describes a strange reality

>>8294994
the influence is instantaneous. Wormholes are not a solution.

>>8295024
Wormholes are a valid hypothesis. The path through the hole is shorted than the path through space.

>>8295024
Nope, it's just a trick with a coincidence counter.

If that was true, you wouldn't need a coincidence counter.

Also, if you add the interference patterns you get two clump patterns, not a coincidence.

>>8295033
Then can you describe what an history for one of the interference-cases look like?

>>8295029
Don't let the fact that wormholes were first proposed as solutions to legitimate relativistic problems fool you into thinking that GTR itself suggests that creating a pair of photons brings a wormhole into existence. Relativistic effects depend on masses and where little mass density is involved one would expect things to spacetime to approximate that of special relativity. Wormholes arose in connection to black holes, regions of immense mass density.

Also, the correlations between entangled particles can occur between particles that were not created together. How are the wormholes connecting them? Wormholes would also violate the no-communication theorem. Wormholes are bits of spacetime just like any other. What's preventing communication faster than light?

I could go on. there are too many problems. it's not a solution.

>>8293882

Because most people are afraid of math. Most people aren't good with math. Most people invoke classical visual analogies and simple casuality chains.

Don't get irritated with people. Manipulate them.

:)

Just work out. It freaks people out when you not only look better than them (or at least more fit) but you act smarter than them too. It doesn't "blow" their mind but it impresses the chicks enough to get a lot more glances and conversation initiation.

File: 2.png (15KB, 691x487px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 691x487px

>>8295055
>the correlations between entangled particles can occur between particles that were not created together. How are the wormholes connecting them?
Why would they need to be created together?

>Wormholes would also violate the no-communication theorem
Not if all they can transfer is the entanglement

>>8295067
>Why would they need to be created together?

What mechanism could possibly explain the creation of a wormhole between two entangled particles other than as a "tube" connecting the two at pair-creation? The problem is only amplified when you consider particles created apart and entangled later.

>Not if all they can transfer is the entanglement

Who says this is the limit? Why would this be the limit? Again, wormholes are bits of spacetime just like any other. What's preventing ordinary particles and fields from taking the shortcut as well?

>>8295033
>>8295047 here
Ok I think I got what you mean.
[math][/math]
If we take the Kim delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, when the signal photon hits [math]D_{0}[/math] this is what happens:
wave function is something like [math]|A\rangle_{S}|A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{S}|A\rangle_{I}[/math]
(where [math]|A\rangle_{S}[/math] and [math]|A\rangle_{I}[/math] correspond to the signal and idler photon going through split A)
let's say it hits it in a spot exclusive to the [math]R_{01}[/math] pattern
the wave function of the idler photon collapses to [math]|A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{I}[/math] ,
while if you hit a spot in the [math]R_{02}[/math] pattern it collapses to:
[math]|A\rangle_{I}-|B\rangle_{I}[/math]

[math]|A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{I}[/math] can only be detected at
[math]D_{01}[/math], [math]D_{03}[/math] or [math]D_{04}[/math] because of interference and similarly [math]|A\rangle_{I}-|B\rangle_{I}[/math] can only be dected at [math]D_{02}[/math], [math]D_{03}[/math] or [math]D_{04}[/math]

Well this is fucking trivial after all, it seems you were right. So trivial that I wonder if I'm missing something.

>>8295214
>won't let me delete
the wave function of the idler photon collapses to [math] |A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{I} [/math] ,
while if you hit a spot in the R02 pattern it collapses to
[math] |A\rangle_{I}-|B\rangle_{I} [/math]

[math] |A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{I} [/math] can only be detected at
D01, D03 or D04 because of interference and similarly [math] |A\rangle_{I}-|B\rangle_{I} [/math] can only be dected at D02, D03 or D04

>>8295214
Fuck I meant to write:
wave function is something like [math]|A\rangle_{S}|A\rangle_{I}+|B\rangle_{S}|B\rangle_{I}[/math]

Well anyway you get the point. Is that your interpretation of the experiment?

>>8294906
c) https://youtu.be/OPV3D7f3bHY?t=3m54s