On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 10:42 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
>> So now you're claiming if the polarizers are not parallel then the law >> of conservation of spin is violated, you're claiming that a zero spin >> particle could decay into 2 spin up particles, and that is pure >> unadulterated extra-virgin bullshit. >> > > *> I think you need to brush up on some elementary quantum mechanics. If > the polarizers are not parallel (at a relative angle theta) then the > probability of an up-up result for Alice and Bob's measurements is given by > sin^2(theta/2).* > And I said that in my long post. *> Since up-up and down-down results are possible for non-aligned > polarizers,* > NO, up-up and down-down is never allowed! If I set my polarizer in the "up" alignment (and I am free to pick any direction I like and call it "up") and a undetermined photon makes it through then then I know with 100% certainty that my photon is now polarized "up", and I know for a fact that if you set your polarizer to the corresponding "down" position then there is a 100% chance the brother photon that is entangled with mine will make it through your polarizer and a 0% probability it will not. Set the polarizers to any angle you like but you will NEVER ever ever see up-up or down-down. If instead of orienting your filter in the "down" position you only misaligne it from mine by 30° then is a 75% chance the photon will make it through your polarizer, if it does then you know with certainty that your photon is now, not in the "up" direction, but in a direction 30° from "up". And you know one other thing, you know that your photon and mine are no longer entangled because misaligned polarizers destroy entanglement. By the way, I use quotation marks because "up" and "down" are completely arbitrary directions, as long as consistency is maintained between what is called "up" and "down" any direction can be chosen. > *all four branches are present in this general case.* > If that was true then the law of conservation of angular momentum would have to be false. The law of conservation of angular momentum is not false. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> 6sm > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1HDFB4m_OJovdD5MGSQeJG-nQ%2BoBNeDZQcUENOJ29DWw%40mail.gmail.com.
