« on: Yesterday at 13:10:51 »
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
As for a proof that would satisfy a power engineer, it is in the first lecture of Nuclear Reactors 101. But that was nearly 60 years ago so I won't attempt to recall it now.They do the practical in the lecture, how exiting.
We will assume that the property we are going to look at is the spin of the particles.We are measuring the spin relative to some particular axis. Only if both measurements use the same axis will the measurements be fully correlated. If perpendicular axes are used, there will be no correlation. If something between is used (45 degrees say), there will be partial correlation.
The 2 particles are separated by 10 million miles. Each location has a detector that will measure the particles spin direction (up or down).
5. Once either particle is measured they are no longer entangled.Sort of. The measuring system is effectively entangled with the unmeasured particle, which is why you can know what the measurement will be if it ever gets done. I think if you measure a particle along the same axis twice in a row, you'd get the same result, so in that way of looking at it, the two particles remain entangled, but the entanglement is now restricted to the axis that has been chosen, so a subsequent measurement along a perpendicular axis isn't going to be correlated with the unmeasured particle.
6. Once you measure the orientation of your particle you instantly know the orientation of the other particle.You instantly know the outcome of a measurement of the other particle along the same axis, regardless of if it has already been done or will be done (a frame dependent distinction). The far guy of course knows none of this, so from his point of view, the outcome is still totally random.
Let's just assume that the usual QM stuff does apply and I'll choose the Copenhagen interpretation of QM for this problem.And there is the source of your conundrum. All the stuff about measurements and wave function collapse are reasonably predictive models of reality but can't claim to be reality.