I think the part that I wasn't expecting here was "you can have entanglement even if quantum theory is false."
pull down to refresh
pull down to refresh
I think the part that I wasn't expecting here was "you can have entanglement even if quantum theory is false."
Very interesting. Thanks for posting. Quantum physics baffles me but @Undisciplined fancies himself somewhat of a quantum physicist.
Indeed
https://m.stacker.news/33938
Yeah, Quantum physics also baffles me, but I find it fascinating and which I could understand more of it.
Me too.
It's kinda implied in this article, but worth emphasizing that quantum entanglement doesn't mean information can be transferred at a speed greater than the speed of light. If you are measuring the state of entagled particle B, you would still need to check the state of particle A by obtaining it through "classical" means, i.e. someone at particle A would need to inform you of its state, whose communication means are bound by the speed of light.
Exactly. I never quite understood the supposed paradox here.
Logical inference in one place about something happening in another is not the same thing as communication between the two places.
From a dumb peasant such as myself I think life is rendered and entanglement is just the beginning in understanding our rendering speed