On Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 3:19:36 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 4:50:01 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> 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 * >> > > *If this simple Yes/No question can't be answered, it seems to argue that > entanglement with the environment is an illusion. AG * >
*So many big brains here, yet no one can answer an ostensibly simple question. Disclosure; it's not a high crime or misdemeanor to admit one doesn't know the answer. That would help. TIA, 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.
