On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 4:59:38 AM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 1:09:23 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 12:05:28 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>> >>> On Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 6:17:30 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 2:46:37 AM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 6:09:10 PM UTC, [email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 12:59:00 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 9:35:18 PM UTC-5, [email protected] >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 4:04:55 PM UTC, [email protected] >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 2:45:40 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 3:20:39 PM UTC-5, >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Assuming that QM is a non-local theory, if two systems become >>>>>>>>>>> entangled, say via a measurement, do they necessary have a >>>>>>>>>>> non-local >>>>>>>>>>> connection? That is, does entanglement necessarily imply >>>>>>>>>>> non-locality? AG >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Entanglement is a form of nonlocality. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> LC >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK, that's what I thought, but consider this. It's clear that >>>>>>>>> information can't be transmitted due to entanglement or non locality. >>>>>>>>> But >>>>>>>>> aren't we entangled with the external world, yet receive information >>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>> it? TIA, AG >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or look at it this way; if I am NOT entangled with the photons >>>>>>>> coming my way allowing me to SEE the world, and NOT entangled with the >>>>>>>> various pressure waves that enable me to hear and feel the world, what >>>>>>>> I am >>>>>>>> entangled with? TIA, AG >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The classical or macroscopic world is in part at least related to >>>>>>> how quantum states are entangled at different times with other states >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the environment. This though is not a level of description that can >>>>>>> tell >>>>>>> you much about these specific interactions. The quantum world is in >>>>>>> effect >>>>>>> in a sort of random Zeno machine that continually reduces wave >>>>>>> functions, >>>>>>> and in effect it can be argued it does this to itself. Quantum phases >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> being continually mixed and re-entangled so as to generate a sort of >>>>>>> quantum phase chaos. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LC >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *This sounds reasonable, but when I try to apply I run into big >>>>>> trouble. Suppose there's a free Nitrogen molecule coming my way, and >>>>>> when >>>>>> it strikes me I experience a breeze. Am I ever entangled with it prior >>>>>> to >>>>>> impact? IIUC, its wf spreads with time. Same for an assumed wave packet. >>>>>> Not sure which wf is appropriate to apply, That aside, but whichever, >>>>>> that's an initial form which spreads and it is most concentrated when >>>>>> initially observed. But where is the observer to set the initial >>>>>> condition? >>>>>> TIA, AG* >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *The general question is this; how does one get an entangled system >>>>> from two UN-entangled systems, each with its own WF? TIA, AG * >>>>> >>>> >>>> *I just don't see how we gets *spontaneous* entangled states from >>>> unentangled states. In the free Nitrogen molecule case described above, we >>>> don't seem to even have a well defined WF of a free Nitrogen molecule to >>>> use, to get entangled with any other system. This goes to the heart of >>>> decoherence theory. It might be a lot of handwaving BS without substance. >>>> TIA, AG* >>>> >>> >>> Entanglement of quantum states occur through an interaction of these >>> states. Similarly decoherence occurs through an interactions. The quantum >>> phase of an entanglement or superposition is transferred through >>> interactions. To try to understand this requires some pretty serious work. >>> Entanglements are described by quotient spaces of groups, symmetric spaces >>> and are related to the universal bundle problem in differential geometry. >>> These spaces are related to the symmetries of interactions. >>> >>> LC >>> >> >> *OK, but in the case of the free Nitrogen molecule, can you define the >> quantum state unambiguously in order to begin to think of how entanglement >> might occur with its environment? If the state is undefined, all which >> follows, fails. AG* >> > > *Let's simplify the model. Instead of a Nitrogen molecule, consider a free > electron at rest in some frame. Its only degree of freedom is spin IIUC. Is > it your claim that this electron become entangled with its environment via > its spin WF, which is a superposition of UP and DN? Does this spin WF > participate in the entanglement? TIA, AG* >
*This seems like a simple Yes/No question. Am I missing something? AG * -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
