File: 3463547227.png (1.89 MB, 1408x768)

1.89 MB PNG

Well if two particles are entangled then they are linked in space time of the universe. Like a branch off.

>>17079200
>coin is now quantumly entangled
actually no. That’s not an example where quantum entanglement matters. You are basically making the first part of an argument called “Bertlmann’s Socks” that John Bell wrote about. One of the first things to understand is that things like this happen in classical physics where nothing is “entangled” and the issues introduced by Quantum theory have to do with more complicated scenarios. Not this one though

>>17079200
Your friends half will be the same as yours. Retard

>>17079200
Thanks to John Bell, we now know experimentally that it's more like take two identical coins, give one to friend who goes to alpha centauri, keep one for yourself. Flip your coin, get tails. Now your friend's coin only has two heads.

>>17079233
Actually the coin got melted down and turned to scrap, looks like bell was wrong.

>>17079200
>its both heads and tails at the same
time
>no not like that!

>>17079200
>instantly becomes
I never understood the big deal about this.
If nobody observed them, who's to say the states weren't already decided when the particles became entangled?
It's not the act of observation that creates these states, it is just uncovering what's already there.
In fact, many years ago there was a computer scientist working at Google who posited that entanglement is the same as waveform collapse due to external interaction. So it's like all the particles observe each other, which sets their quantum states, and no "spooky action" is needed.

>>17079200
they have a corelation but it's collapsed.
it's like measuring the collapse of two particles, after you measured them.
they collapsed when they got measured. but if you didn't look at the result it doesn't mean they are still in superposition. they are already collapsed, you just didn't yet find out how. the measurement itself is what colapses it, it's the interaction, not you knowing about it. it's the posibility of extracting the information from the system that colapses it, not when a fucking consciousness finds out about it lol.

>>17079351
>it's like measuring the collapse of two particles, after you measured them.
it's like *finding out, after measuring.

I have always thought of quantum as some stupid crap some devious people invented to trick people away from the real explanation. take the famous schizophrenic cat. well no shit before we open the box we wouldnt know its death or alive, but thats "the knowledge of the cat" inside our head that is undetermined, not the actual cat. the actual cat has a point in time when it fucking falls sideway and dies. I feel like people are trying to steer the discussion of quantum into the vague crap of "we can control reality with our mind" when the real phenomeno that should be looked into is "some people has some sort of 4th dimension invisible limb that can do cool stuffs" because the latter is a real concrete thing that can be tried and error while the former is some voodoo gibberish that demotivated people from studying it. its a clever wool over our eyes

>>17079668
the cat experiment is not feasible. it's a thought experiment, not an actual experiment you can perform. you cannot put a cat in superposition, it's too large, it would interact with stuff and would collapse the superposition.
so in the thought experiment the cat isn't actually dead or alive you just don't know yet. the cat literally is both dead and alive at the same time, and you collapse the state when you interact with it.
so it's an example, for you to get the gist of the idea. it's not something you can actually make, at that scale.

>>17079200
Look up a good explanation of John Bells experiment. It proves either nonlocality, super determinism, or non-realiity. So probably non locality because the other options are retarded

I’d just like to reiterate that cutting a coin in half after you flipped it but didn’t look at it is NOT an example of quantum entanglement. That is a classical system and nothing about it has quantum “coherence”. This is a crucial point.

For a quantum system, like for example a electron flying through a vacuum tube, it is crucial to maintain its coherent quantum state that it not be hitting other particles or dissipating radiation off into space or having some detector interposed on its path to measure it. It only remains coherent and in one of these delicate quantum superposition states so long as it stays very isolated and unaffected by outside interactions. That’s why in the double-slit experiment, if you put some measurement device in the middle, it destroys the quantum interference effects .

A coin on the other hand is constantly interacting with the air, the light, and certainly with the hand you catch it with. It is easy to imagine a very sensitive hand, or some hand-like detector, that can tell whether the coin surface contacting the hand-like detector has a heads shaped embossing or a tails-like embossing. That is because when it hits the hand (-like detector) it instantly exchanges a lot of information one could detect. This is known in Quantum Theory as decoherence. Genuine quantum effects only exist in truly isolated systems where these information-leaking decoherent processes are carefully eliminated from the experimental setup.

QM is not an extension of common sense, and QM does not apply directly back onto common sense ideas. It is different and you can’t just apply quantum principles outside the domain of their applicability

>>17079695
Yup. This example isn’t an example of Quantum superposition. Thank you for the clarifying reply.

>>17079200
>multiplying by 0

More like John bellend lol

Why do 80 IQ faggots post so much on a science board? Go back to pol

>>17079200
Particles are much smaller than a coin and thus have vastly different behaviours, ergo OP is a midwit and a faggot