How Quantum Mechanics Works?

[philosopher]

I have two questions regarding Quantum Mechanics:

Entanglement and Randomness. I don't seem to understand these concepts. I can't find the logic.

1. Entanglement:

As far as I understand it:

Entanglement is when, say 2 photons can be emitted from the same source, and they are entangled, that is if you know one of the photon's spin (up) you know the other spin (down) as well.

This is not because they are only correlated, say like if you have a pair of gloves, left and right, and you send one of the gloves to New York the other to Paris, you know when you open the box with a left handed glove in New York, you know there is a right handed glove in Paris. But this is not how Entanglement works, because the Bell experiment shows that the two particles are linked across space and time, meaning its spin is directly influencing the other particle's spin across space, instantaneously - meaning speed limit of light will not apply.

Yet at the same time you cannot use this to send communication faster than speed.

What I would like to know is:

1. - most important of all: How can a photon instananeously affect another photon?

2. If a photon can affect another photon, why can we not send information?

2. Randomness:

According to Heisenberg, all quantum mechanics is fundamentally random.

I know that the de-Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory has another explanation that is deterministic when taking non-locality into account (see Entanglement), but this is not sufficient explanation.

So how does randomness work? How can the world be fundamentally "random"?

If I have a random number generator, it is making use of an advanced equation using time to generate a pseudo-random number. That is, it is not completely random, in-fact it is not random at all.

So how does this "fundamentally random" quantum mechanics work? How can something be truely random? What is the mechanics so to speak, behind randomness? And if you know the mechanics, is it genuinly random then?

Spare me of the Parallel Universe/Many Worlds Theory.

[QuantumT]

By "randomness", do you mean probability distribution?
'Cause there's nothing really random in QM. It's the most predictable thing in the universe!

Regarding entanglement, we know from the double slit experiment, that particles who are measured behave in a certain way. They are "determined". This determination could also apply to entanglement.
When two particles connect they become "entangled", and because we measure them, they also become determined. The measurement itself forces them to have the same "determination". That's my theory anyway.
I do not believe non-locality can occur without measurement.

Did that help?

[surreptitious57]

Random simply means that all probabilities are equally likely to happen
It doesnt mean something that is entirely unpredictable or spontaneous

All probabilities exist between 0 and I even if specific ones such as those pertaining to quantum mechanics are unknown

Instantaneous information is not possible as c is finite and that is the maximum speed that information can be transmitted
The spooky action at a distance as Einstein referred to it is not fully understood but it is however an observed phenomenon

[QuantumT]

Instantaneous information is not possible

There's a reason that General Relativity and QM is a marriage made in hell. GR says it's not possible. QM shows it happening.

[philosopher]

By "randomness", do you mean probability distribution?
'Cause there's nothing really random in QM. It's the most predictable thing in the universe!

Regarding entanglement, we know from the double slit experiment, that particles who are measured behave in a certain way. They are "determined". This determination could also apply to entanglement.
When two particles connect they become "entangled", and because we measure them, they also become determined. The measurement itself forces them to have the same "determination". That's my theory anyway.
I do not believe non-locality can occur without measurement.

Did that help?

You were correct about the probability distribution. That is what I refer to as randomness.

Personally I believe it is down to this simple equation:



- which I interpret as one or the other (Position/Momemtum) becoming more fuzzy than the other.
. which I in turn interprets not as actual uncertainty for the universe as such. I believe the particles of the universe "know" both their positions and momemtums but that there is a fundamental limit to how much we can KNOW about position and momemtum.

It's still there, we just can't know them.

For the entanglement part, you would still have to explain how measuring one instantaneously affects the other even billions of miles away.

Personally I think that entanglement is behaving like a universal wave, according to the Pilot Wave Theory which has a Universal Wave Function where everything in the entire universe is linked instantanously through this wave of behavior guiding all the particles.

https://www.wired.com/2016/05/new-suppo ... ntum-view/

That may sound like a throwback to classical mechanics, but there’s a crucial difference. Classical mechanics is purely “local”—stuff can affect other stuff only if it is adjacent to it (or via the influence of some kind of field, like an electric field, which can send impulses no faster than the speed of light). Quantum mechanics, in contrast, is inherently nonlocal. The best-known example of a nonlocal effect—one that Einstein himself considered, back in the 1930s—is when a pair of particles are connected in such a way that a measurement of one particle appears to affect the state of another, distant particle. The idea was ridiculed by Einstein as “spooky action at a distance.” But hundreds of experiments, beginning in the 1980s, have confirmed that this spooky action is a very real characteristic of our universe.

In the Bohmian view, nonlocality is even more conspicuous. The trajectory of any one particle depends on what all the other particles described by the same wave function are doing. And, critically, the wave function has no geographic limits; it might, in principle, span the entire universe. Which means that the universe is weirdly interdependent, even across vast stretches of space. The wave function “combines—or binds—distant particles into a single irreducible reality,” as Sheldon Goldstein, a mathematician and physicist at Rutgers University, has written.

[philosopher]

Instantaneous information is not possible

There's a reason that General Relativity and QM is a marriage made in hell. GR says it's not possible. QM shows it happening.

Well, there is a lengthy paper trying to prove that they can work together. It requires a bit of math though.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3896068/

[QuantumT]

For the entanglement part, you would still have to explain how measuring one instantaneously affects the other even billions of miles away.

Those billions of miles are theoretical. It's currently unprovable. And I don't believe it's possible. No measurement = no non-locality.

As for the how, it only make sense if the universe is computed. Everything that happens, origins from the same place. The central processor.
I know this sounds exotic, but atleast it makes sense!

[philosopher]

For the entanglement part, you would still have to explain how measuring one instantaneously affects the other even billions of miles away.

Those billions of miles are theoretical. It's currently unprovable. And I don't believe it's possible. No measurement = no non-locality.

As for the how, it only make sense if the universe is computed. Everything that happens, origins from the same place. The central processor.
I know this sounds exotic, but atleast it makes sense!

Are you familiar with the holographic principle?

That everything in our universe is like the event horizon of a black hole where information about a particle that falls into a black hole, is captured forever, and that our universe has an "edge" - an event horizon too where information about everything is stored.

This would explain a lot, if everything we see in our 3d view is an illusion created by a tiny storage storing all information. This will explain how particles can influence each other over vast distances.

No need for intelligent processor computing anything. It happens by simple maths evolving to become more complex like the Mandelbrot set.

[QuantumT]

Are you familiar with the holographic principle?

Yes, I'm very familiar with it, and it fits well to my computational theory.

Here's an interview with Leonard Susskind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNgIl-qIklU

(Right click and open in new tab to stay here!)

[surreptitious57]

There is currently no rational explanation for entanglement across space and time that requires faster than light communication
Therefore filling the gap in knowledge with currently unfalsifiable hypotheses does not actually make the problem more solvable

And so the default position is to retain an open mind and not assume anything until it can actually be tested
It could be that the most popular explanation of faster than light communication is actually completely false

At some point the answer will come but what that is and when it will be is unknown
So well as an open mind free of untested assumptions one also needs much patience
It is indeed entirely possible the actual solution will not be discovered in our lifetime

[QuantumT]

There is currently no rational explanation for entanglement across space and time that requires faster than light communication
Therefore filling the gap in knowledge with currently unfalsifiable hypotheses does not actually make the problem more solvable

And so the default position is to retain an open mind and not assume anything until it can actually be tested
It could be that the most popular explanation of faster than light communication is actually completely false

At some point the answer will come but what that is and when it will be is unknown
So well as an open mind free of untested assumptions one also needs much patience
It is indeed entirely possible the actual solution will not be discovered in our lifetime

I'm not assuming anything. I'm not sure of anything. I just have a favorite theory. The one that fits best right now. Might change. Might not.

[QuantumT]

He's more sure than I am!

[gaffo]

I have two questions regarding Quantum Mechanics:

Entanglement and Randomness. I don't seem to understand these concepts. I can't find the logic.

where does it say in the book of GM/GP that logic is needed?

my understanding of it is that you need to through logic under the bus first and foremost.

[gaffo]

Random simply means that all probabilities are equally likely to happen
It doesnt mean something that is entirely unpredictable or spontaneous

your view is not that of GM/GP.

[gaffo]

For the entanglement part, you would still have to explain how measuring one instantaneously affects the other even billions of miles away.

Those billions of miles are theoretical. It's currently unprovable. And I don't believe it's possible. No measurement = no non-locality.

As for the how, it only make sense if the universe is computed. Everything that happens, origins from the same place. The central processor.
I know this sounds exotic, but atleast it makes sense!

Are you familiar with the holographic principle?

That everything in our universe is like the event horizon of a black hole where information about a particle that falls into a black hole, is captured forever

not forever, just until the BH evaporates.

, and that our universe has an "edge" - an event horizon too where information about everything is stored.

Universe's event horizon relates to WRT our viewpoint............so matter traveling faster than light WRT to us is lost to us.

not to matter "over there" - for them, we are lost!


forever.