I love the content, thank you for taking the time to do this, Professor! I just want to call you Brian, because I've seen so many of your lectures but hesitate to do so because I have so much respect for you. I'm not a mathematician or physicist, however, I'm fascinated by these ideas. I've been following these lessons (at my own pace, of course, because I'm trying to understand and be able to do these derivations on my own. I can honestly say that if I had been inspired by you earlier in life, I would have studied physics. Regardless, I'm still grateful for all the knowledge and insight I've gained from listening to you for some time, so once again, thank you!
Help! I need a physicist!!!! But seriously, What if the interaction of two spinning particles caused a synchronization of the spin of the particles? Something that small would spin so fast that it would take another interaction or a (relatively) long time to desynch. Would that be a way that could be explained in different words? wouldn’t that have the same effect as spooky action at a distance? The interaction synchs the spin of the entangled particles so even after they’re separated their correlated. No longer spooky. Like girls who dorm together Wesley effect if the live alone after no socially dominant female or a romantic partner in theory you would know the cycle of one according to the cycle of the other. But since they’re so much smaller theres less complexity to throw off the cycles
Following every single episode from the beginning, it just gets so intuitive and understandable, especially the derivations and implicate use of math. Being an extremely huge fan of Dr. Brian, I've watched nearly every hr long episodes from varied concepts like String theory, multiverses and it gets so beautiful and interesting. Thank you for spending some time from your busy schedule just to make such beautiful interactive videos.
I’ve Solved Einsteins Riddle. Space and Time is being smashed into your face at the speed of light. Then retreating at the speed of light thus creating an illusion of time, hence backward time travel.
Thank you for your work! I've been a pupil of Quantum Physics since 2007 officially and I use it to teach people how to manifest since we know that observation does in fact affect reality. Entanglement is what I use to show people that what happens to one happens to ALL, so kindness and love are imperative for us to BE.
This is the first new thing I've learned from this series and I've gotta say, there is no better way that I would like to learn the mathematics of quantum entanglement.
Dr. Greene I hope you read these comments. Your Daily Equation vids are really helping me get through the COVID-19 home imprisonment. I’m a retired mechanical/nuclear engineer and lifelong student. Please don’t stop these, at least until life goes back to normal. 👍👏😊🙏
Boy these lectures are fun. I feel very lucky to be able listen to these lectures. It is a real pleasure to be able to sit here at home and have my grey matter so profoundly rattled ..... (in a good way). Thank you so much for doing them at this difficult time.
I am definitely interested!! Please continue these. I had to pause it for a second just to post this after that comment. Thank you so much for your passion and time!
Professor Greene, it has been quite fascinating to learn from you about these beautiful equations and ideas. In the upcoming episodes, I would like to know about the Paul Dirac equation regarding the existence of antimatter and also about the equation that Professor Stephen Hawking asked to be put on his tombstone. Thank you professor. Your way of explaining the concepts is really quite inspiring.
I'm a happy World Science Festival subscriber, but I just discovered this series! Looks like I have 13 episodes to catch up on, but "Your Daily Equation" sounds like it had a great deal of fun and interesting content! :-D Thank you for sharing such high quality content with the world!!!
I think that some possible underlying substructure of what we consider today as 'elementary' particles, may explain these strange behaviors. And I think exactly this is what hasn't been ruled out.
What Bell's theorem ruled out are Einstein's local hidden variables. What isn't ruled out is nonlocal hidden variables. In other words, showing one of the axioms (specifically Separability) in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper was wrong doesn't imply the paper's conclusion about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics was also wrong. Proving Einstein was wrong doesn't imply Bohr was right.
@@brothermine2292 How is non-local hidden variables different from local hidden variables? My understanding is that what has been ruled out, is that the results are predetermined, that the (pre-dertermined) hidden variables simply don't exists.
I have seen many videos about Entanglement and on some level at least, I do understand what is being spoken about although I couldn't give a lecture lasting more than 45 seconds on it ! What intrigues me though is the actual physical process of "entanglement", how exactly are the individual particles manipulated? I just don't see how an entangled particle could be first separated from its partner and transported to some distant spot, I know I probably sound stupid but often with me, seeing a demonstration or having the technical process spelled out are the only ways I can absorb the information I seek. Thanks Brian-and BIG BIG THANKS for the WSF!
All my gratitude! This is really fantastic! Rendu à un âge plus avancé, je peux enfin prendre le temps qu'il faut pour consolider mes connaissances en science...et mieux prendre conscience à quel point l'univers est fascinant...vous êtes un pédagogue hors pair!
Learning a lot from these talks. I also love that you have not avoid writing down some actual mathematics to back ups the ides being discussed. Keep 'em coming!
Hi Prof Greene, could you do an episode on supersymmetry please! I did basic field theory and understand how symmetries are crucial for physics, but never managed to learn supersymmetry! Would love to see how it is so popular and crucial in string theory.
At this moment, I’m fairly sure that there are more people wearing unpaired socks than ever before. I would like to hear more about John Bell and how he managed to show what’s happening before we look at something
professor Greene can you please explain in the up coming videos about STEPHEN HAWKING's equation on identifying the area of the event horizon by the entropy of a black hole.
I love videos like this. Thank you. I have a couple of, probably ignorant, questions. First, what happens to the particles *_after_* you measure them? Do they spontaneously return to a “fuzzy haze” such that if you remeasure them a second time you could get the opposite result? Secondly, how do you know two particles are entangled without first measuring/observing them? Lastly, how are the particles known to be entangled then separated and moved to a different location to observe/experiment? Do scientists put them in a special box and fly one to New York and the other to California? Yes, I know the NY and CA example was just an example? But, I would assume that even in the same lab *first you have to know the particles are entangled.* Then you have to separate them some distance to verify that each is always opposite of the other and the second to be observed seemingly “decides” faster than light. This stuff is incredibly fascinating. But, I think I know how my dog feels when I try to explain algebra to him.
Dear Dr. Greene, thank you for making these videos. I have a question regarding fields that I hope you could address. In QFT a particle is a wave-like perturbation on a field, the speed of a wave is determined by the media, but the speed of a particle is determined by the source. How these two are reconciled in QFT. QFT reconstructs the particle-like behavior by adding an infinite number of planar waves. However, in experiments we can have a particle traveling with any speed we like (less than c). On the other hand, it is known of waves that their speed is determined by the media on which they travel. I couldn't have a wave on the surface of a pond travel at any speed I like. The speed is determined by the characteristics of the pond. So, how these two are reconciled in QFT. Any pointers of where to find the answer are highly appreciated. Thank you very much, Juan.
Sir Brian Greene! I request you to make a video about the intrinsic quantities of matter : charge, spin and mass. That we actually wanna to gain the concept of intrinsic quantities of matter into a some physical appearance..
Thank you for a great lecture professor Greene! Would you try to explain how the quantum entanglement - correlation of the states of the particles at the the surfaces of two black holes can lead to a wormhole “inside” between the black holes? Would this mean that we can in theory construct a stable bridge and travel back in time? Regards from Prague, Czech Republic!
Probability is a concept wrapped in a formula used to explain what we cannot YET, for certain, specify (I stated this earlier in response to one Brian's previous videos). The roll of a die IS calculatable - it's just hard... Once we ascertain what spin is based upon, many answers will follow.
Q: Sin² x + Cos x² = 1 is true only on euclidean geometry. We already know that space is curved so why do we use this assumption in derivations of quantum equations?
Ive soved Einsteins “Spooky Action” riddle. Space and Time are being pressed up into your face at the speed of Light then returning back instantaneously thus, resulting in the illusion of time. “ Time is but an illusion.”
And that is exactly the point ... a single particle is being treated as two different particles ... Imagine you stand on one side of a river and see a pipe sticking out from the water. You are a child so you get curious about it, you reach in, grab it and start dragging. Now you see another pipe moving on the other side of the river. It is the same pipe, you just don't see the segment under the water.
I don't agree with Einstein in regards to his work on relativity, but I do agree with him regarding this. Nothing is probabilistic or random, not even the result of a die. If you knew the exact metrics that went into throwing a die before you released it, its outcome is not probabilistic. Its result will be definite. We however, are not omniscient and are bound with limited knowledge, so we are forced to the realms of describing physics in probabilistic terms.
Thank you for your eloquent explanation of complex physical phenomena. My question is, how do we know that the spin state of the second particle changed instantly without measuring it? The experiment carried out by Alain Aspect points to yet another scenario, namely that the change in status of the second particle, in this case the polarization of the photon, only takes place at the moment when the photon interacts with the polarizer, i.e. not when the first photon is measured , because at this moment the position of the polarizer on the other side is not even set. The setting of the second polarizer occurs randomly, so the status of the second photon therefore does not depend on the measurement of the first photon, but on the setting of the second polarizer.
the spookiness is due to the fluctuations in potential fields - that causes the probabilities to change states hence an oscillator is just humming around in its potential shell... I realised how complex potential fields are considering implications of computers... But also led me to consider how potential fields function and that is I would suggest relativistic action... Entanglement only functions where dependencies exist independence specifies just that an independent solution...
0:47 his name comes again n again that's why he were unique person. He was such genius that , Even when he was trying to disprove any theory came up with new but working theory. Like Quantum entanglement and his biggest blunder 🤔
the old question of what separates my conscious experience from another entities, I believe are; the degrees of entanglement. the more entangled, the more the "same" or "sharing".
Brian, Quantum Entanglement is real not only at microscopic/subatomic scale but also at macroscopic cosmic scale. We now have a working Quantum Theory of Gravity that is testable and complete with reproducible empirical experiments with the same results if repeated over and over again and again, confirmed by empirical observations in nature with 7-Sigma level results, guided by empirical laws and physical/mathematical equations that are predictive and precise. FYI: Quantum Gravity or Quantum Gravitation have three types that are equivalent to and manifested by Quantum Gravitational Entanglement - a Quantum Entanglement at Macroscopic Cosmic Scale namely: 1. Quantum Anti-Gravity = Spin Up Quantum Entanglement State; 2. Quantum Neutral Gravity = Superposition Quantum Entanglement State; and 3. Quantum Gravity = Spin Down Quantum Entanglement State. More detailed information could be found on the published papers 2 years ago in London, Paris, and Zurich, online and at the two scientific Journals ACADEMIA and REAL TRUE NATURE or alternatively, you can google the name of the author ROEL REAL ROVIRA
I have two questions. According to the math, two entangled particles reveal their spin (or other measured property) the instant one of them is measured. Two entangled particles are in flux until particle 1 is measured spin up, then particle 2 is known to be spin down--mathematically. First question: are there any experiments that measure both entangled particles simultaneously? Question two: if particle 1 is remeasured, is particle 2 still entangled?
Dr. Greene, in listening to you describe entanglement where "you somehow effect" something at a distance. It makes Everett's Many Worlds interpretation seems simpler. Question: ***What's your take on Many Worlds vs. Wave Function Collapse? ***
I have a question: I understand that Einstein says that simultaneity is relative to the observer, so, some observers might or might not see the particles change spins at the same time? Does this mean that this "spooky action at a distance" is also relative?
What makes the particle decide what state it chooses when we make the measurement? What is the mechanism by which the particle chooses a certain state?
Could you please talk about the principle of LEAST ACTION and Feynman PATH INTEGRALS in relation to String Theory or M-Theory ? I always hear you talking about String theory without ever seeing its main mathematical formulations ... It is time to see some equations of String Theory written down in action ..
So two electrons in the same shell are entangled since they are in each other's vicinity or being in the vicinity does not necessarily mean they are interacting?
I always thought the spins are like electrons and must be in opposite directions to balance each other in order to lower the MO energy...but that’s only in close proximity. The entanglement theory seems to suggest that when the particles are separated in space, somehow, they still think they are together which is broken upon measurement. I wonder if that measurement is transferred by something faster than the speed of light?
@@Unexpectedthings007 But would not this violate the limit of the speed of light for the transfer of information? 1. Entangle very much particles. 2. Keep them unmeasured, put each in a separate box. 3. Give each box a meaning, e.g. letters, numbers, symbols. 4. Separate the two sets of particles far enough. 5. Measure the particle with the desired symbol at location one -> decoherence. 6. Immediately, the entangled particle at location two would be also decoherent. 7. So, observe all "angular momentums" of all particles in all boxes, without measuring, whether they are decohered. With this "angular momentum", one would get the information from loc.1 to loc.2 without measuring? Could you go more into detail please? Best regards
@@dominiqueschlogl8700 suppose you and I are travelling in a spaceship and we have two entangled electrons and you measure the spin of the electron and it comes in up state so by entanglement mine should be in down state right but I would not be able to communicate with you faster than light to actually tell you it's in down state so technically no information transfer.
@@dominiqueschlogl8700 To answer this kind of question properly, it's important to clarify the foundational issues of why SR forbids superluminal speeds and what kind of superluminal speeds it forbids. There are several independent arguments of this kind that tell us several different things. Superluminal transmission of information would violate causality, since it would allow a causal relationship between events that were spacelike in relation to one another, and the time-ordering of such events is different according to different observers. Since we never observe causality to be violated, we suspect that superluminal transmission of information is impossible. This leads us to interpret the metric in relativity as being fundamentally a statement of possible cause and effect relationships between events. We observe the invariant mass defined by m2=E2−p2m2=E2−p2 to be a fixed property of all objects. Therefore we suspect that it is not possible for an object to change from having |E|>|p||E|>|p| to having |E|
At 5:05 you say Einstein called entanglement spooky action at a distance. Yet Sabine Hossenfelder claims Einstein mentioned spooky action at a distance while discussing wave collapse upon measurement. Why do you disagree with her? Thanks.
Is it possible that each fundamental particle in the universe contains a record of all the interactions it experiences since it came into existence? When we measure one of its properties we are simply recording the current state of that property.
I wonder which is stranger - black holes, or quantum entanglement... We definitely don't have an explanation about why the entanglement is happening and how the particles seem to have a connection with infinite speed, right? It really seems to me, that it can be used for communications with some advance technologies, can't it?
if there are more space dimensions, the entanglement could be possibly explained as 2 entangled particles that have moved into the 3D dimension x,y,z but never moved into the other dimension, so that when we make the observation in the 3D space we just see the spin direction of the particles as they are moving in some way in the other dimension, that would also explain the superposition? the probabilistic result of the observation could be nothing other than the actual position of the particles in the other space dimension during the measurement or as it appears in the 3D space when it has a specific position in the other dimension of space. Same as when we move in the 3D space, we could move in 2 dimension x and z and never move in the y, so in this case, the particles can move in x,y,z and never move in the other additional dimension. Sorry if I said something obvious :-) for the Pro.
Quantum entanglement necessities the "locality" (in quantum dimensions) and " unity" that implies "overlap" as previewed by the quantum theory as from the beginning that can be exemplified by the overlap of the wave functions of two electrons localized in a box whose resultant wave function should be in the singlet state (S=0).
I'd love to see this series continue in the future, even if it's only weekly or monthly or whatever your schedule allows.
I concur
I love the content, thank you for taking the time to do this, Professor! I just want to call you Brian, because I've seen so many of your lectures but hesitate to do so because I have so much respect for you. I'm not a mathematician or physicist, however, I'm fascinated by these ideas. I've been following these lessons (at my own pace, of course, because I'm trying to understand and be able to do these derivations on my own. I can honestly say that if I had been inspired by you earlier in life, I would have studied physics. Regardless, I'm still grateful for all the knowledge and insight I've gained from listening to you for some time, so once again, thank you!
Being a physicist I have huge respect for guy like u buddy who show interest on how the nature works
@@Unexpectedthings007 I can't imagine anything more interesting and breathtaking than physics. Thank you!!!
Help! I need a physicist!!!! But seriously, What if the interaction of two spinning particles caused a synchronization of the spin of the particles? Something that small would spin so fast that it would take another interaction or a (relatively) long time to desynch.
Would that be a way that could be explained in different words? wouldn’t that have the same effect as spooky action at a distance? The interaction synchs the spin of the entangled particles so even after they’re separated their correlated. No longer spooky.
Like girls who dorm together Wesley effect if the live alone after no socially dominant female or a romantic partner in theory you would know the cycle of one according to the cycle of the other. But since they’re so much smaller theres less complexity to throw off the cycles
Following every single episode from the beginning, it just gets so intuitive and understandable, especially the derivations and implicate use of math. Being an extremely huge fan of Dr. Brian, I've watched nearly every hr long episodes from varied concepts like String theory, multiverses and it gets so beautiful and interesting. Thank you for spending some time from your busy schedule just to make such beautiful interactive videos.
Brian Greene is the kind of teacher we all wanted to have
I’ve Solved Einsteins Riddle. Space and Time is being smashed into your face at the speed of light. Then retreating at the speed of light thus creating an illusion of time, hence backward time travel.
Thank you for your work! I've been a pupil of Quantum Physics since 2007 officially and I use it to teach people how to manifest since we know that observation does in fact affect reality. Entanglement is what I use to show people that what happens to one happens to ALL, so kindness and love are imperative for us to BE.
This is the first new thing I've learned from this series and I've gotta say, there is no better way that I would like to learn the mathematics of quantum entanglement.
Dr. Greene I hope you read these comments. Your Daily Equation vids are really helping me get through the COVID-19 home imprisonment. I’m a retired mechanical/nuclear engineer and lifelong student. Please don’t stop these, at least until life goes back to normal. 👍👏😊🙏
Boy these lectures are fun. I feel very lucky to be able listen to these lectures. It is a real pleasure to be able to sit here at home and have my grey matter so profoundly rattled ..... (in a good way).
Thank you so much for doing them at this difficult time.
This is what the promise of the internet was hoped for. Thank you Doctor
I am definitely interested!! Please continue these. I had to pause it for a second just to post this after that comment. Thank you so much for your passion and time!
Professor Greene, it has been quite fascinating to learn from you about these beautiful equations and ideas. In the upcoming episodes, I would like to know about the Paul Dirac equation regarding the existence of antimatter and also about the equation that Professor Stephen Hawking asked to be put on his tombstone. Thank you professor. Your way of explaining the concepts is really quite inspiring.
I'm a happy World Science Festival subscriber, but I just discovered this series! Looks like I have 13 episodes to catch up on, but "Your Daily Equation" sounds like it had a great deal of fun and interesting content! :-D Thank you for sharing such high quality content with the world!!!
Ahahaha another one Who gonna sleep late this night😁😁😁
Thanks Brian, I can't wait to see the episode on John Bell contribution on entanglement.
@21:22 I am more impressed with Brian's ability to change the sock's spin like that!!! :D
"That has not been ruled out." I wish you'd do a whole video on that.
I think that some possible underlying substructure of what we consider today as 'elementary' particles, may explain these strange behaviors. And I think exactly this is what hasn't been ruled out.
What Bell's theorem ruled out are Einstein's local hidden variables. What isn't ruled out is nonlocal hidden variables. In other words, showing one of the axioms (specifically Separability) in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper was wrong doesn't imply the paper's conclusion about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics was also wrong. Proving Einstein was wrong doesn't imply Bohr was right.
@@brothermine2292 How is non-local hidden variables different from local hidden variables? My understanding is that what has been ruled out, is that the results are predetermined, that the (pre-dertermined) hidden variables simply don't exists.
I have seen many videos about Entanglement and on some level at least, I do understand what is being spoken about although I couldn't give a lecture lasting more than 45 seconds on it !
What intrigues me though is the actual physical process of "entanglement", how exactly are the individual particles manipulated? I just don't see how an entangled particle could be first separated from its partner and transported to some distant spot, I know I probably sound stupid but often with me, seeing a demonstration or having the technical process spelled out are the only ways I can absorb the information I seek.
Thanks Brian-and BIG BIG THANKS for the WSF!
All my gratitude! This is really fantastic! Rendu à un âge plus avancé, je peux enfin prendre le temps qu'il faut pour consolider mes connaissances en science...et mieux prendre conscience à quel point l'univers est fascinant...vous êtes un pédagogue hors pair!
This is great stuff
Really nice to get a daily dose of light physics explanations
Learning a lot from these talks. I also love that you have not avoid writing down some actual mathematics to back ups the ides being discussed. Keep 'em coming!
What a beauty of physics, it made me love physics even more.
Hi Prof Greene, could you do an episode on supersymmetry please! I did basic field theory and understand how symmetries are crucial for physics, but never managed to learn supersymmetry! Would love to see how it is so popular and crucial in string theory.
I remember reading about this in fabric of the cosmos and it sent chills up my spine
At this moment, I’m fairly sure that there are more people wearing unpaired socks than ever before.
I would like to hear more about John Bell and how he managed to show what’s happening before we look at something
Please continue and make more on Quantum Entanglement 🙏🏻
I'm actually surprised how well he can explain to the general public a quantum phenomenon that is usually taught in masters degrees.
professor Greene can you please explain in the up coming videos about STEPHEN HAWKING's equation on identifying the area of the event horizon by the entropy of a black hole.
Thank you, Dr. Greene! So clear!!!
I love videos like this. Thank you. I have a couple of, probably ignorant, questions.
First, what happens to the particles *_after_* you measure them? Do they spontaneously return to a “fuzzy haze” such that if you remeasure them a second time you could get the opposite result?
Secondly, how do you know two particles are entangled without first measuring/observing them?
Lastly, how are the particles known to be entangled then separated and moved to a different location to observe/experiment? Do scientists put them in a special box and fly one to New York and the other to California? Yes, I know the NY and CA example was just an example? But, I would assume that even in the same lab *first you have to know the particles are entangled.* Then you have to separate them some distance to verify that each is always opposite of the other and the second to be observed seemingly “decides” faster than light.
This stuff is incredibly fascinating. But, I think I know how my dog feels when I try to explain algebra to him.
Outstanding presentation. Thank you. I am grateful.
Dear Dr. Greene, thank you for making these videos. I have a question regarding fields that I hope you could address.
In QFT a particle is a wave-like perturbation on a field, the speed of a wave is determined by the media, but the speed of a particle is determined by the source. How these two are reconciled in QFT.
QFT reconstructs the particle-like behavior by adding an infinite number of planar waves. However, in experiments we can have a particle traveling with any speed we like (less than c). On the other hand, it is known of waves that their speed is determined by the media on which they travel. I couldn't have a wave on the surface of a pond travel at any speed I like. The speed is determined by the characteristics of the pond. So, how these two are reconciled in QFT. Any pointers of where to find the answer are highly appreciated.
Thank you very much,
Juan.
Sir Brian Greene!
I request you to make a video about the intrinsic quantities of matter : charge, spin and mass. That we actually wanna to gain the concept of intrinsic quantities of matter into a some physical appearance..
Thank you soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much professor for such a wonderful equation😊☺🙂🙂☺😊......
Thank you for a great lecture professor Greene! Would you try to explain how the quantum entanglement - correlation of the states of the particles at the the surfaces of two black holes can lead to a wormhole “inside” between the black holes? Would this mean that we can in theory construct a stable bridge and travel back in time? Regards from Prague, Czech Republic!
Brian - could you possibly talk a little bit about the physics of quantum computing? Thank you for these lectures.
Dr. Green as always superb video, but you have to go down the road of the possible definite quantities in QM.
Love the long ones, more the better, any uncommon facts
Probability is a concept wrapped in a formula used to explain what we cannot YET, for certain, specify (I stated this earlier in response to one Brian's previous videos). The roll of a die IS calculatable - it's just hard... Once we ascertain what spin is based upon, many answers will follow.
Q: Sin² x + Cos x² = 1 is true only on euclidean geometry. We already know that space is curved so why do we use this assumption in derivations of quantum equations?
Oh my god, spooky socks at a distance! :-)
Ive soved Einsteins “Spooky Action” riddle. Space and Time are being pressed up into your face at the speed of Light then returning back instantaneously thus, resulting in the illusion of time. “ Time is but an illusion.”
And that is exactly the point ... a single particle is being treated as two different particles ... Imagine you stand on one side of a river and see a pipe sticking out from the water. You are a child so you get curious about it, you reach in, grab it and start dragging. Now you see another pipe moving on the other side of the river. It is the same pipe, you just don't see the segment under the water.
Damn this is literally one of the best explanation I’ve seen this series is A1 all heat 🔥🔥bless you bro
I don't agree with Einstein in regards to his work on relativity, but I do agree with him regarding this. Nothing is probabilistic or random, not even the result of a die. If you knew the exact metrics that went into throwing a die before you released it, its outcome is not probabilistic. Its result will be definite. We however, are not omniscient and are bound with limited knowledge, so we are forced to the realms of describing physics in probabilistic terms.
Thank you professor ive learnt so much from all of these talks
best teacher ever
Thank you for your eloquent explanation of complex physical phenomena. My question is, how do we know that the spin state of the second particle changed instantly without measuring it? The experiment carried out by Alain Aspect points to yet another scenario, namely that the change in status of the second particle, in this case the polarization of the photon, only takes place at the moment when the photon interacts with the polarizer, i.e. not when the first photon is measured , because at this moment the position of the polarizer on the other side is not even set. The setting of the second polarizer occurs randomly, so the status of the second photon therefore does not depend on the measurement of the first photon, but on the setting of the second polarizer.
Thanks Alot to explain this topic
I like the way you explain things🙌🙌
Professor... Could you please tell where do you get these papers from???
the spookiness is due to the fluctuations in potential fields - that causes the probabilities to change states hence an oscillator is just humming around in its potential shell... I realised how complex potential fields are considering implications of computers... But also led me to consider how potential fields function and that is I would suggest relativistic action... Entanglement only functions where dependencies exist independence specifies just that an independent solution...
thanks for sharing dr b 🍏
0:47 his name comes again n again that's why he were unique person.
He was such genius that , Even when he was trying to disprove any theory came up with new but working theory. Like Quantum entanglement and his biggest blunder 🤔
Great video! Can you do a video about the math behind retrocasuality????
I love this series, but I wish it could have been structured to include questions and answers.
There is Q&A.
Please, tell us more about Bell's theorem. I looks to me that it is a kind of sophistry. Manipulation with statistic formulas.
May you guys be blessed with excess nature's gifts. Solve it cause this definitely will change life
the old question of what separates my conscious experience from another entities, I believe are; the degrees of entanglement. the more entangled, the more the "same" or "sharing".
hahah great! always clear. And thanks for the improvisations!
I would like to see a discussion on locality versus realism in relation to entanglement.
Something on geometry would be nice. Maybe spinors or just spaces with curvature (Riemannian)
This is awesome
Thank you so much 😀
u should have put the link of the paper on the description
Quantum Entanglement is in its beauty a brilliant solution.
But also needed.
Please do a video on Bell's Theorem. This video was great!
Brian, Quantum Entanglement is real not only at microscopic/subatomic scale but also at macroscopic cosmic scale. We now have a working Quantum Theory of Gravity that is testable and complete with reproducible empirical experiments with the same results if repeated over and over again and again, confirmed by empirical observations in nature with 7-Sigma level results, guided by empirical laws and physical/mathematical equations that are predictive and precise. FYI: Quantum Gravity or Quantum Gravitation have three types that are equivalent to and manifested by Quantum Gravitational Entanglement - a Quantum Entanglement at Macroscopic Cosmic Scale namely: 1. Quantum Anti-Gravity = Spin Up Quantum Entanglement State; 2. Quantum Neutral Gravity = Superposition Quantum Entanglement State; and 3. Quantum Gravity = Spin Down Quantum Entanglement State. More detailed information could be found on the published papers 2 years ago in London, Paris, and Zurich, online and at the two scientific Journals ACADEMIA and REAL TRUE NATURE or alternatively, you can google the name of the author ROEL REAL ROVIRA
I have two questions. According to the math, two entangled particles reveal their spin (or other measured property) the instant one of them is measured. Two entangled particles are in flux until particle 1 is measured spin up, then particle 2 is known to be spin down--mathematically. First question: are there any experiments that measure both entangled particles simultaneously? Question two: if particle 1 is remeasured, is particle 2 still entangled?
Which particle are you mentioning about, is it the electrons, protons, positron, quarks or atom or molecules
Does anyone know a link to this animation i really need it !!
Dude is a legend
Dr. Greene, in listening to you describe entanglement where "you somehow effect" something at a distance. It makes Everett's Many Worlds interpretation seems simpler. Question: ***What's your take on Many Worlds vs. Wave Function Collapse? ***
Very wonderfull explanation
I have a question: I understand that Einstein says that simultaneity is relative to the observer, so, some observers might or might not see the particles change spins at the same time? Does this mean that this "spooky action at a distance" is also relative?
Seems like the particles are connected through wifi!
Jokes apart, this is one of the most intriguing and beautiful topic.
What would happen if you measured the particles at the exact same time in two different places
What makes the particle decide what state it chooses when we make the measurement? What is the mechanism by which the particle chooses a certain state?
Quantum Mechanics it is so fascinating, in theory it makes sense in reality my brain froze , definite😉
Go further into this please!
My socks dont match either, love it.
Could you please talk about the principle of LEAST ACTION and Feynman PATH INTEGRALS in relation to String Theory or M-Theory ? I always hear you talking about String theory without ever seeing its main mathematical formulations ... It is time to see some equations of String Theory written down in action ..
Please talk more about bells theorem
So two electrons in the same shell are entangled since they are in each other's vicinity or being in the vicinity does not necessarily mean they are interacting?
I always thought the spins are like electrons and must be in opposite directions to balance each other in order to lower the MO energy...but that’s only in close proximity. The entanglement theory seems to suggest that when the particles are separated in space, somehow, they still think they are together which is broken upon measurement. I wonder if that measurement is transferred by something faster than the speed of light?
I hope you live longer than me ❤️❤️love you Professor❤️❤️
Sir, where can we get these original papers online?
Truly amazing
Superposition reminds me of intermediate axis theorem. Tennis racket rotation. Look it up.
Are all particles correlated? How do you get them to be correlated?
Could you say something about quantum computing which relies on entanglement.
23:40 deflates all the thrill.
Does it make sense to describe the process of entanglement and spin direction with the color change, which changes the direction during splitting?
I don’t get it how we could know that the second particle was influenced instantaneously without measuring it as well.
U have to go to angular momentum in advanced qm book for this topic
@@Unexpectedthings007
But would not this violate the limit of the speed of light for the transfer of information?
1. Entangle very much particles.
2. Keep them unmeasured, put each in a separate box.
3. Give each box a meaning, e.g. letters, numbers, symbols.
4. Separate the two sets of particles far enough.
5. Measure the particle with the desired symbol at location one -> decoherence.
6. Immediately, the entangled particle at location two would be also decoherent.
7. So, observe all "angular momentums" of all particles in all boxes, without measuring, whether they are decohered.
With this "angular momentum", one would get the information from loc.1 to loc.2 without measuring? Could you go more into detail please?
Best regards
@@dominiqueschlogl8700 suppose you and I are travelling in a spaceship and we have two entangled electrons and you measure the spin of the electron and it comes in up state so by entanglement mine should be in down state right but I would not be able to communicate with you faster than light to actually tell you it's in down state so technically no information transfer.
@@dominiqueschlogl8700 To answer this kind of question properly, it's important to clarify the foundational issues of why SR forbids superluminal speeds and what kind of superluminal speeds it forbids. There are several independent arguments of this kind that tell us several different things.
Superluminal transmission of information would violate causality, since it would allow a causal relationship between events that were spacelike in relation to one another, and the time-ordering of such events is different according to different observers. Since we never observe causality to be violated, we suspect that superluminal transmission of information is impossible. This leads us to interpret the metric in relativity as being fundamentally a statement of possible cause and effect relationships between events.
We observe the invariant mass defined by m2=E2−p2m2=E2−p2 to be a fixed property of all objects. Therefore we suspect that it is not possible for an object to change from having |E|>|p||E|>|p| to having |E|
@@Unexpectedthings007 Hi, thanks for that, these are a lot of aspects! Will take some time to sort it. Best regards.
21:32 what is really spooky is that when you open the box and see the purple sock... the blue sock which is DEFINITELY blue might no longer exist
At 5:05 you say Einstein called entanglement spooky action at a distance. Yet Sabine Hossenfelder claims Einstein mentioned spooky action at a distance while discussing wave collapse upon measurement. Why do you disagree with her? Thanks.
Sir, if anyhow we stop spinning of one partical is any effect on entangle partical according to spooky action
Is it possible that each fundamental particle in the universe contains a record of all the interactions it experiences since it came into existence? When we measure one of its properties we are simply recording the current state of that property.
👍 - But not all, to assume. Until one particle cannot anymore reveal any information of it entangled partner.
No need anymore.
I wonder which is stranger - black holes, or quantum entanglement... We definitely don't have an explanation about why the entanglement is happening and how the particles seem to have a connection with infinite speed, right? It really seems to me, that it can be used for communications with some advance technologies, can't it?
How does the pairing happen? Do the particles continue spinning after measurement?
Are there any experiments that show that the spin of the particles is random even after interaction between them?
if there are more space dimensions, the entanglement could be possibly explained as 2 entangled particles that have moved into the 3D dimension x,y,z but never moved into the other dimension, so that when we make the observation in the 3D space we just see the spin direction of the particles as they are moving in some way in the other dimension, that would also explain the superposition? the probabilistic result of the observation could be nothing other than the actual position of the particles in the other space dimension during the measurement or as it appears in the 3D space when it has a specific position in the other dimension of space. Same as when we move in the 3D space, we could move in 2 dimension x and z and never move in the y, so in this case, the particles can move in x,y,z and never move in the other additional dimension. Sorry if I said something obvious :-) for the Pro.
Quantum entanglement necessities the "locality" (in quantum dimensions) and
" unity" that implies "overlap" as previewed by the quantum theory as from the beginning that can be exemplified by the overlap of the wave functions of two electrons localized in a box whose resultant wave function should be in the singlet state (S=0).