[guest45734]

Non-locality of particles or quantum entanglement allows almost instantaneous information transfer beyond the speed of light in 4D space time.

https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_quantum_nonlocality.html

Many wild and wonderful ideas exist as to how this EPR paradox arises. Could this be related to extra spacial dimensions or perhaps due to a photon from its point of view not experiencing time or space

https://phys.org/news/2014-05-does-light-experience-time.html

Does anyone sentient have any insight.

[chris]

Can you please ensure that you format your post headings as questions please.

[opportunity]

Quantum entanglement.....wow.

If there's an elephant in the room of physics that's it.

The idea is avoided, I know that.

[Kryptid]

Technically speaking, quantum entanglement can't be used to transmit information faster than light.

However, one way to visualize the correlated properties between two entangled particles is to view them as being connected by a wormhole: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wormholes-quantum-entanglement-link/

[Bogie_smiles]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/

This paper covers the territory pretty well. I always liked the Bob and Alice experiments.

[geordief]

When two small objects interact could  they become one object and then split into two again  but with each pair defined by the other (opposite halves)?

So detecting one of the pair would automatically tell you something about the other......

Can't be so simple as that,can it?

[chiralSPO]

As I understand it, quantum entanglement does not involve instantaneous information transfer.

It is very hard to give examples that are both accurate to QM and relatable to our experiences, but the common comparison is this:

Two twin brothers want to share their birthday cake, but they are both on vacation in different places. Their mother cuts the cake with a single slice and sends each piece to one of her sons. Until opening the package, neither son knows whether the cut was made evenly, or if the other twin got a larger or smaller piece. It doesn't matter how far away the twins are, when one opens his package to see 60% of a cake, he instantly knows that his brother will be disappointed.

This example is representative of most QM entanglement sort of experiments in that an operation (cutting of the cake) is done that produces two complimentary things (slices of cake), which are then sent mailed) different ways such that information about them is unknown until the thing is actively inspected (package opened). The example falls short of QM reality because the outcome (who got how much cake) is determined by the mother (and she knows)--and even if some randomization is introduced, it still doesn't quite capture the nature of superposition... but it works well enough.

There is nothing magic about the instantaneity here. Each twin already has the knowledge that the cake slices will together add to one cake, and then presented with one slice, has all the information required to know the size of the other slice. This breaks down if their assumption is invalid (maybe mom ate a piece too). It is also important to remember that it still took time to send the cake to each of the twins, so the information sent from mom to son is constrained by the speed of light. That each son gains insight into both packages at the same time is only a matter of logic, not physics.

[geordief]

If particles are local (wave)excitations in a global field would it make sense for them to "become one" in any interaction and then break apart  into two constituent parts?

 Can  they ever "break into three or more parts"?

[guest45734]

There are numerous articles indicating the information transfer is at least 10000 times faster than light https://newatlas.com/quantum-entanglement-speed-10000-faster-light/26587/

Are these articles wrong.

[guest45734]

If particles are local (wave)excitations in a global field would it make sense for them to "become one" in any interaction and then break apart  into two constituent parts?

 Can  they ever "break into three or more parts"?

Seee Bose Einstein Condensates
https://www.nature.com/articles/35051038

[Colin2B]

Excellent answer @chiralSPO
At an extremely simplistic level you can view the 2 sides of a coin as being entangled. Toss the coin and see heads, you don’t need to look at the other side to see what it says. Of course, as @chiralSPO says this doesn’t do justice to the overall concept.
Entanglement arises in situations where we have partial knowledge of the state of two systems. We say that the states of 2 systems are “independent” if knowledge of the state of one of them does not give useful information about the state of the other, but, we say the states are entangled when information about one improves our knowledge of the other. Basically, entanglement is a lack of independence.
It’s important to recognise that entanglement is an everyday occurrence within atoms and in the results of particle collisions, independant outcomes are rare.

There are numerous articles indicating the information transfer is at least 10000 times faster than light https://newatlas.com/quantum-entanglement-speed-10000-faster-light/26587/

Are these articles wrong.

Entanglement is beloved of popular articles because it sounds mysterious, it is also very often misrepresented.
Note the article says “So is the spooky action at a distance associated with entanglement actually instantaneous, or does it simply has a very large propagation speed?”
Whereas the paper says “If the spooky action does exist, what is its speed?”
The paper places a lower bound on that speed, if the action exists.

I haven’t been right through the paper, but it does not indicate any propagation of information between Alice and Bob, what it does show is that when Alice measures the polarisation she can use her prior knowledge to determine the state of the other photon.
What is really interesting here is the distance of Alice & Bob from Charlie, over that distance the photons have remained entangled. 

[Bill S]

If entanglement is an intrinsic feature of quantum particles, surely, there needs to be no transfer of information at the quantum level. 

Later the three get together to compare notes

As the article states; information is shared later.

[Colin2B]

If entanglement is an intrinsic feature of quantum particles, surely, there needs to be no transfer of information at the quantum level. 

I think this depends on what you are calling information.
When 2 particles collide they transfer information about their momentum.

Later the three get together to compare notes

As the article states; information is shared later.

Again we have to be clear what we mean by information.
The article states “Charlie generates a pair of entangled photons, and records the time.
When Alice detects a photon, she records the polarization and the time at which the measurement was made. When Bob measures his photon, he also records the polarization and the time of arrival.”

So we can see that all 3 collect a lot of data and they get together to analyse it.

Yes, data is information, but don’t confuse it with the idea of spooky transfer of information.

[PmbPhy]

There's only one piece of knowledge one can know from entanglement and that's the state and position of the other particle

[Bill S]

When 2 particles collide they transfer information about their momentum.

This is true, but when they collide there is no distance between them.  I was thinking of information transfer at distance.

For example; if two entangled quons are one LY apart, it should not be possible for information to be exchanged between them in less than one year.   If, however, there is no underlying difference between them, there is no necessity to postulate any transfer of information, at any speed.

Not my (crackpot?) idea - David Bohm's.

[Bill S]

The article states “Charlie generates a pair of entangled photons, and records the time.
When Alice detects a photon, she records the polarization and the time at which the measurement was made. When Bob measures his photon, he also records the polarization and the time of arrival.”

So we can see that all 3 collect a lot of data and they get together to analyse it.

Yes, data is information, but don’t confuse it with the idea of spooky transfer of information.

All the data/information you mention is collected by people, and any exchange takes place at subluminal speed.  I certainly see nothing spooky or problematic about that.

However, I think I would be right in saying that the question of transfer of information (if, indeed, any is transferred) between  distant quons is still unresolved.

[Bill S]

There's only one piece of knowledge one can know from entanglement and that's the state and position of the other particle,

Absolutely; but are we not looking at two different scenarios?

1. Transfer of information between quons and people.
2. Transfer of “information” between one quon and another.

These seem to be quite different situations.

[jeffreyH]

If information could be transferred faster than light speed then you could detect events from the future light cone.

[Bill S]

Agreed.  This must be another argument against the transfer of information in entanglement scenarios.

[guest45734]

Agreed.  This must be another argument against the transfer of information in entanglement scenarios.

How about Quantum teleportation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation this allows for information transfer but at no more than light speed. https://phys.org/news/2017-07-physicists-transmit-earth-to-space-quantum-entanglement.html
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/china-s-quantum-satellite-achieves-spooky-action-record-distance

I follow your arguments above, but WHY do many apparently reputable people produce papers claiming information is transferred faster than the speed of light. Are they just misunderstanding the pie or coin analogies above for instantaneous information transfer OR is there something to their claims.

Edit: https://www.livescience.com/28550-how-quantum-entanglement-works-infographic.html (The transfer of state from photon A to Photon B takes place at a speed at least 10000 times faster than the speed of light)
Qouting from the above link
In quantum physics, entangled particles remain connected so that actions performed on one affect the other, even when separated by great distances. The phenomenon so riled Albert Einstein he called it "spooky action at a distance."

Metaphorically: Taking an additional slice out of one of two entangled pies instantly adjusts the size of the slice in the other entangled pie, at a speed at least 10000 times faster than the speed of light.

Or is it more accurate to state that the state of neither photon is known until one is observed, and once one is observed then you instantly know the state of the other photon, regardless of separation distance.