– In the 1930s, Albert Einstein was upset
with quantum mechanics. He proposed a thought experiment where, according to the theory,
an event at one point in the universe could instantaneously affect another event arbitrarily
far away. He called this “spooky action at a distance” because he thought it was absurd.
It seemed to imply faster than light communication, something his theory of relativity ruled out.
But nowadays, we can do this experiment, and what we find is, indeed, spooky. But in order
to understand it, we must first understand spin. All fundamental particles have a property
called spin. No, they’re not actually spinning, but the analogy is appropriate. They have
angular momentum, and they have an orientation in space. Now, we can measure the spin of
a particle, but we have to choose the direction in which to measure it, and this measurement
can have only one of two outcomes. Either the particle’s spin is aligned with the
direction of measurement, which we’ll call spin up, or, it is opposite the measurement,
which we’ll call spin down. Now, what happens if the particle spin is vertical, but we measure
it’s spin horizontally? Well then, it has a 50% chance of being spin up, and a 50% chance
of being spin down, and after the measurement, the particle maintains this spin, so measuring
its spin actually changes the spin of the particle. What if we measure spin at an angle
60 degrees from the vertical? Well now, since the spin of the particle is more aligned to
this measurement, it will be spin up 3/4 of the time, and spin down 1/4 of the time. The
probability depends on the square of the cosine of half the angle. Now, an experiment like
the one Einstein proposed can be performed using two of these particles, but they must
be prepared in a particular way. For example, formed spontaneously out of energy. Now, since
the total angular momentum of the universe must stay constant, you know that if one particle
is measured to have spin up, the other, measured in the same direction, must have spin down.
I should point out, it’s only if the two particles are measured in the same direction that their
spins must be opposite. Now here’s where things start to get a little weird. You might imagine
that each particle is created with a definite well-defined spin, but that won’t work, and
here’s why. Imagine their spins were vertical and opposite. Now, if they’re both measured
in a horizontal direction, each one has a 50/50 chance of being spin up. So, there’s
actually a 50% chance that both measurements will yield the same spin outcome, and this
would violate the law of conservation of angular momentum. According to quantum mechanics,
these particles don’t have a well-defined spin at all. They are entangled, which means
their spin is simply opposite that of the other particle. So, when one particle is measured,
and its spin determined, you immediately know what the same measurement of the other particle
will be. This has been rigorously and repeatedly tested experimentally. It doesn’t matter at
which angle the detectors are set, or how far apart they are, they always measure opposite
spins. Now just stop for a minute, and think about how crazy this is. Both particles have
undefined spins, and then you measure one, and immediately you know the spin of the other
particle, which could be light-years away. It’s as though the choice of the first measurement
has influenced the result of the second faster than the speed of light, which is, indeed,
how some theorists interpret the result. But not Einstein. Einstein was really bothered
by this. He preferred an alternate explanation, that all along the particles contained hidden
information about which spin they would have if measured in any direction. It’s just that
we didn’t know this information until we measured them. Now, since that information was within
the particles from the moment they formed at the same point in space, no signal would
ever have to travel between the two particles faster than light. Now, for a time, scientists
accepted this view that there were just some things about the particles we couldn’t know
before we measured them. But then along came John Bell with a way to test this idea. This
experiment can determine whether the particles contain hidden information all along, or not,
and this is how it works. There are two spin detectors, each capable of measuring spin
in one of three directions. These measurement directions will be selected randomly, and
independent of each other. Now, pairs of entangled particles will be sent to the two detectors,
and we record whether the measured spins are the same, both up, or both down, or different.
We’ll repeat this procedure over and over, randomly varying those measurement directions,
to find the percentage of the time the two detectors give different results, and this
is the key, because that percentage depends on whether the particles contain hidden information
all along, or if they don’t. Now, to see why this is the case, let’s calculate the expected
frequency of different readings if the particles do contain hidden information. Now, you can
think of this hidden information like a secret plan the particles agree to, and the only
criterion that plan must satisfy is that if the particles are ever measured in the same
direction, they must give opposite spins. So, for example, one plan could be that one
particle will give spin up for every measurement direction, and its pair would give spin down
for every measurement direction. Or another plan, plan two, could be that one particle
could give spin up for the first direction, spin down for the second direction, and spin
up for the third direction, whereas its partner would give spin down for the first direction,
spin up for the second direction, and spin down for the third direction. All other plans
are mathematically equivalent, so we can work out the expected frequency of different results
using these two plans. Here, I’m visually representing the particles by their plans,
their hidden information. With plan one, the results will obviously be different 100% of
the time. It doesn’t matter which measurement directions are selected, but it does for particles
using the second plan. For example, if both detectors measure in the first direction,
particle A gives spin up, while particle B gives spin down. The results are different.
But if instead, detector B measured in the second direction, the result would be spin
up, so the spins are the same. We can continue doing this for all the possible measurement
combinations, and what we find, is the results are different five out of nine times. So,
using the second plan, the results should be different 5/9 of the time, and using the
first plan, the results should be different 100% of the time, so overall, if the particles
contain hidden information, you should see different results more than 5/9 of the time.
So what do we actually see in experiment? Well, the results are different only 50% of
the time. It doesn’t work, so the experiment rules out the idea that all along, these particles
contain hidden information about which spin they will give in the different directions.
So, how does quantum mechanics account for this result? Well, let’s imagine detector
A measures spin in the first direction, and the result is spin up. Now, immediately you
know that the other particle is spin down if measured in the first direction, which
would happen randomly 1/3 of the time. However, if particle B is measured in one of the other
two directions, it makes an angle of 60 degrees with these measurement directions, and recall,
from the beginning of this video, the resulting measurement should be spin up 3/4 of the time.
Since these measurement directions will be randomly selected 2/3 of the time, particle
B will give spin up 2/3 times 3/4 equals half of the time. So both detectors should give
the same results half of the time, and different results half of the time, which is exactly
what we see in the experiment. So quantum mechanics works. But there is debate over
how to interpret these results. Some physicists see them as evidence that there is no hidden
information in quantum particles, and it only makes sense to talk about spins once they’ve
been measured, whereas other physicists believe that entangled particles can signal each other
faster than light to update their hidden information when one is measured. So, does this mean that
we can use entangled particles to communicate faster than light? Well, everyone agrees that
we can’t. And that is because the results that you find at either detector are random.
It doesn’t matter which measurement direction you select, or what’s happening at the other
detector, there’s a 50/50 probability of obtaining spin up or spin down. Only if these observers
later met up and compared notebooks, would they realize that when they selected the same
direction, they always got opposite spins. Both sets of data would be random, just the
opposite random from the other observer. That is, indeed, spooky, but it doesn’t allow for
the communication, the sending of information from one point to another, faster than light,
so it doesn’t violate the theory of relativity. And that, at the very least, would make Einstein
happy.

Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance
Tagged on:                                                                                                                 

100 thoughts on “Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance

  • September 11, 2019 at 10:25 pm
    Permalink

    You break the laws of quantum physics when you try the same tactics every day dismiss cases dismissed as a theory

    Reply
  • September 13, 2019 at 5:08 am
    Permalink

    Huh

    Reply
  • September 13, 2019 at 3:01 pm
    Permalink

    Matter is spinning my head

    Reply
  • September 13, 2019 at 7:36 pm
    Permalink

    He does not know how to explain to laymen.

    Reply
  • September 14, 2019 at 10:23 am
    Permalink

    Unfortunately,I understood,but didn't retain anything.

    Reply
  • September 15, 2019 at 1:07 am
    Permalink

    so this basically proves the 4th dimention in a way, it travels thru it then goes back to the third

    Reply
  • September 15, 2019 at 5:09 am
    Permalink

    I can't understand why we can't use this to communicate faster than the speed of light, data =0 or 1
    Can't we do spin up=1 and spin down =0
    And by that should we have like instant communication even among light years? Should that solve the problem of communication between solar systems/galaxies?. As I know a point a sends light(=1) and nolight(=0)(light or electricity) can't we do: point a spring up+point b spring down =1 and in reverse =0?

    Reply
  • September 16, 2019 at 7:04 am
    Permalink

    Very confusing explanation.

    Reply
  • September 16, 2019 at 8:28 am
    Permalink

    ഒന്നും മനസിലായില്ല: ആകെ പൊക

    Reply
  • September 16, 2019 at 8:30 am
    Permalink

    9:14:00 i think this will help.😭🤒😥🤕

    Reply
  • September 16, 2019 at 4:39 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Veritasium,
    Have you ever saw in your life time one laboratory quantum entanglement setup in person?
    Watching this video of yours makes me think that never happened.

    Reply
  • September 17, 2019 at 4:21 pm
    Permalink

    after so much turning you get dizzy

    Reply
  • September 18, 2019 at 1:22 pm
    Permalink

    EPR experiment done at CERN in the 80s I think…
    Proven .

    Reply
  • September 18, 2019 at 3:28 pm
    Permalink

    Same random sequence at a distance. With no hidden information. Sounds like a really good cryptography key exchange to me!

    Reply
  • September 18, 2019 at 3:35 pm
    Permalink

    Now my brain is spinning in random direction.

    Reply
  • September 18, 2019 at 4:00 pm
    Permalink

    Why there is no Arabic translation????

    Reply
  • September 19, 2019 at 1:45 am
    Permalink

    I think all particles has its counterpart.
    Think about when all the particles was created, everyone with its counterpart, doing exactly the opposite and affected by the particles around them in the opposite way.
    So, there's no communication, they are going to be in the opposite status forever.

    Reply
  • September 19, 2019 at 1:45 am
    Permalink

    I think all particles has its counterpart.
    Think about when all the particles was created, everyone with its counterpart, doing exactly the opposite and affected by the particles around them in the opposite way.
    So, there's no communication, they are going to be in the opposite status forever.

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 3:24 am
    Permalink

    Must tell something, that vibration and also thermodynamic its Big game, that A and B or A A or B B or B A or B B or A A do Not Just Up or Down or Left or Right they do All degree , itd us magnetic force thermodynamic vibration impulsation Pulsar Quasar etc.. for more detail do not contact me or… ciaooo .

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 3:31 am
    Permalink

    I can almost grasp this

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 6:28 am
    Permalink

    The problem is that scientists try to think of it as particles defining/dictating each others spins in and of them selves.
    Or could the unknown information be a Grand Designer who specified the way particles act when being observed and when not being observed?
    I would also like to point out that quantum physics these days is mostly theoretical and the only possible way of observing is through a computer model written by a programmer.

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 8:55 am
    Permalink

    You could use it for some kind of indirect communication. like if spin is up walk to the left else to the right.

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 4:12 pm
    Permalink

    Instantaneous communication has no speed; it can't violate Relativity because speed is distance over time and the time is 0 (dividing by 0 is impossible). It's not applicable to Einstein. Saying it doesn't violate Relativity means nothing. It's completely outside of the scope of travel because it doesn't travel. It's in one frame and then in two places in the next frame. There's no movement.

    Reply
  • September 20, 2019 at 7:27 pm
    Permalink

    china proves you wrong man. sorry

    Reply
  • September 21, 2019 at 2:03 am
    Permalink

    Derek we love you n all… but… All the fundamental particle spin in the world, will never ever, make that weird jumpsuit thing okay. Were you auditioning for a part in a remake of the running man or something?

    Reply
  • September 21, 2019 at 2:13 am
    Permalink

    Okay, So i’ve been boggling my mind over entanglement for a while… At the moment i tend to lean with Einstein, it sure seems like spooky action. I have a question or two for those much more educated than myself though. Thanks ahead of time.

    – When looking at entanglement, there is always talk of ‘particles’ even when the experiments are done with photons… what exactly do they mean by particle? A single atom, a molecule, a subatomic particle or a photon?

    – Did i hear this correctly, to entangle particles they must be split from a single source? With photons that makes sense, but with any other actual atom, that does not make sense to me… you cant have a stable half of say, a single carbon atom, can you?

    Reply
  • September 21, 2019 at 2:19 pm
    Permalink

    Maybe Einstein is right but in a higher dimension.

    Reply
  • September 21, 2019 at 4:44 pm
    Permalink

    8:10 The Mass Effect already did it

    Reply
  • September 21, 2019 at 5:46 pm
    Permalink

    Finally, I found a good and simple explanation. Thank you!

    Reply
  • September 22, 2019 at 3:43 am
    Permalink

    Good video….wrong conclusion due to poor logic.

    Reply
  • September 22, 2019 at 11:10 am
    Permalink

    I have watched many videos on entanglement and the 'instantaneous action at a distance' effect but not one person can give a proper explanation on why or how it happens.

    Reply
  • September 22, 2019 at 6:23 pm
    Permalink

    reading the comments I'm relieved that I'm not the only one understanding any of this.

    Reply
  • September 23, 2019 at 12:38 pm
    Permalink

    Honest question, if they have an angular momentum and an orientation in space why can't we say that they are literally spinning? Isn't that the definition of spinning?

    Reply
  • September 23, 2019 at 5:16 pm
    Permalink

    Neymer can spin through.

    Reply
  • September 23, 2019 at 10:36 pm
    Permalink

    The worst thing about Einstein is that at the same time Niels Bohr offered quantum theory and Einstein did not accept it.
    Newton did not have similar chance, he was one and only in that time. I thing today is problem how to keep Einstein theory and accept Bohr's theory or some other. It was much easier to keep Newton theory and accept Einstein's. First of all, people could say: Physics is not so exact science. After 100 years, it is very difficult to destroy Einstein popularity, like you say that Rolling Stones are average band. So, they try to find a way to accept Einstein and some other theory. After that everything will be PERFECT, again, until somebody find out something new, and again the same story.

    You see, it is difficult to leave religion.:)

    Reply
  • September 24, 2019 at 5:27 pm
    Permalink

    There's probably something in this that went over my head, but what if you had two grids of 1000 or so entangled particles (like pixels on a screen), and the particles of one grid were having their orientations manipulated to spell out letters, while ones in the other grid were having their measurements taken. Would it be a legible (albeit noisy) result?

    Reply
  • September 25, 2019 at 5:54 pm
    Permalink

    This is where many worlds theory might actually make sense. No information travels, it's just as we measure, we enter this different version of the world, and the particles have opposite spins.

    Reply
  • September 26, 2019 at 3:14 am
    Permalink

    This is explained so badly

    Reply
  • September 26, 2019 at 3:22 am
    Permalink

    Surprised I haven’t seen a single JoJo reference referring to the property of spin lmao

    Reply
  • September 26, 2019 at 1:23 pm
    Permalink

    What if they just used plan A

    Reply
  • September 27, 2019 at 4:30 pm
    Permalink

    What?…..…………………………?🤔🤔🤔🤔😴

    Reply
  • September 27, 2019 at 5:55 pm
    Permalink

    Ok. There is one thing i don´t get. How can we guarentee that we are measuring the same entagled particle from one side to the other ? The experiments i´ve seen have been made with polarized light , so it is a beam on light, not one single photon. So, if we are talking about entaglement we would need to be sure that we are looking at the right entangles particle at both sides, right ?

    Reply
  • September 27, 2019 at 6:08 pm
    Permalink

    This is basically Schrödinger's cat. But I just can't wrap my head around it. To me it seems like a 50/50 result tells us nothing special… Why doesn't the particle have a spin before we measure it? How do we KNOW that? That's kinda like saying the whole universe was created 5 seconds ago, with all of our memories and everything, or that my carton of milk contains water untill I open it…. Isn't it more reasonable that particles DO have the spin before we measure it? And two particles that are entangled have once been in the same location and now have opposite spins? If you bring all those entangled particles away from eachother, then measure them in order, its no "hocus pokus" that the "random" you see is opposite? It's like me giving two people a stack of papers, they are black and white papers, but each stack is opposite the other in a random order, now I tell you to go 1000 lightyears away from each other, note the black and white papers in order, and come back and compare results… wow… it's all oppisite! spooky!… no?… no it's not spooky at all…
    Could someone enlighten me to why this comparison doesn't work? Why isn't Schrödinger's cat already dead BEFORE I open the box?

    Reply
  • September 28, 2019 at 5:17 am
    Permalink

    It's almost time for spooky season!

    Reply
  • September 28, 2019 at 7:31 am
    Permalink

    What if the direction of measurement is same, if somehow we can Control the direction… Then communication is possible faster than speed of light. It has some probabilities of happening.

    Reply
  • September 28, 2019 at 11:19 am
    Permalink

    What

    Reply
  • September 28, 2019 at 11:06 pm
    Permalink

    5/9? is this a Fahrenheit conspiracy?

    Reply
  • September 29, 2019 at 6:17 am
    Permalink

    These experiments assume that hidden variable probability should not be 50%, but what if there is hidden variable probability which is 0.00001% in one favor but our inability to measure it? Smaller we go down at level of sub atomic particles, chances of experimental errors increase due to observations going through multiple level of detection thus erasing information. Because every detection/communication cause information loss.

    Reply
  • September 29, 2019 at 8:48 am
    Permalink

    At 2:30, wouldn't it be a 25% chance as 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4

    Reply
  • September 29, 2019 at 11:30 pm
    Permalink

    Particles are not really particles nor waves… they are Derek Mullers

    Reply
  • September 30, 2019 at 6:08 am
    Permalink

    How do we know that they have angular momentum in the first place?

    Reply
  • September 30, 2019 at 8:43 pm
    Permalink

    How do you entangle particals anyway?

    Reply
  • September 30, 2019 at 9:12 pm
    Permalink

    This is a great explanation, just enough detail to satisfy me without going over my head. Thank you!

    Reply
  • September 30, 2019 at 9:21 pm
    Permalink

    Wait, I'm confused. If there is a 50% chance 1 will be spin up, and a 50% chance the other will be spin up, does that not mean there will be only a 25% chance both will be spin up? (2:25 is where it is).

    Reply
  • September 30, 2019 at 9:29 pm
    Permalink

    It’s just the same particle in two different places at once

    Reply
  • October 1, 2019 at 9:17 am
    Permalink

    You know what else is spooky .. I have to be up at 4:00 am…

    Reply
  • October 1, 2019 at 9:43 am
    Permalink

    When you apply the no communication rule me thinks a hoax lurks about

    Reply
  • October 1, 2019 at 1:23 pm
    Permalink

    Er… exactly WHAT was he measuring?

    At 1:50 he said he must prepare particles who are… formed out of energy. So WHAT – fisically what – was that THING he measured? And HOW did he split that WHAT?

    He said that this little WHATS change only after they're measured. Why would measuring in affect anything?
    Things change if you SPLIT them to measure their halfs. But he never mentioned spliting that WHAT he was measuring.

    WHY didn't he show us WHAT he was measuring and HOW.

    Reply
  • October 1, 2019 at 2:39 pm
    Permalink

    He's so handsome. Got me all entangled over here.

    Reply
  • October 1, 2019 at 3:26 pm
    Permalink

    Funny how im sudenly having a lot of videos with spooky on the title hmmmmm….

    Reply
  • October 2, 2019 at 8:08 am
    Permalink

    i watch this video everyyear in October

    Reply
  • October 2, 2019 at 9:17 pm
    Permalink

    A necklace on a videogame that hasn't even been released yet brought me here.

    Reply
  • October 2, 2019 at 9:31 pm
    Permalink

    The only thing spinning now is my head

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 12:55 am
    Permalink

    He dumbed it down, and I still don't understand. Ha!

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 3:54 am
    Permalink

    What if thers no such thing as up and down?????

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 6:42 am
    Permalink

    The guy is showing spinning and says it is actually not spinning. Somebody is on crack.

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 7:31 am
    Permalink

    I get it, my head is spinning…

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 4:09 pm
    Permalink

    Ooh “QUANTUM”.. OK next video! 😂

    Reply
  • October 3, 2019 at 7:27 pm
    Permalink

    How do particles have momentum and orientation without actually spinning? How would Einstein be satisfied if you said he was wrong about the particles having hidden information and therefore proving that the theory of relativity is wrong? After all, are they not communicating with each other faster than light?

    Reply
  • October 4, 2019 at 6:23 am
    Permalink

    How do you even begin to get two particles that are entangled? How can you be sure they’re entangled and not just two random particles?

    Reply
  • October 5, 2019 at 5:11 pm
    Permalink

    What if our understanding of distance is flawed? Or changes based on scale? If lightspeed simply can’t be broken then that would seem to mean that the two particles actually exist in exactly the same place in the universe. Even though we perceive them being to two very different places at distance.

    Reply
  • October 6, 2019 at 6:38 am
    Permalink

    “You spin me right round, baby right round, like a quantum particle, right round…”

    Reply
  • October 7, 2019 at 4:11 am
    Permalink

    So the only problem as I understand it, is that we cannot control the spin in any way, otherwise we know what the other particle is doing. But we just can’t create predictable patterns

    Reply
  • October 7, 2019 at 9:30 am
    Permalink

    Just pondering a possible way to use this for instant comms. Really want a quantum wifi connection with zero latency all over the globe.

    Could a third quantum particle be entangled? Or is it only possible to have two particles in an entangled set?
    Just wondering if a third could somehow act as a parity bit if it is measured at a different angle from the second and the result used to narrow down the possibilities?

    Or maybe multiple entangled particle – 1 source bit at the first location and enough entangled particles at the destination so that all directions can be measured at the same moment. This should provide enough info to work out exactly the state of the source

    Possible issues – is there infinite angles of measurement required? Is it mathematically possible to arrive at certainty of the source particle from measuring a reasonable amount of angles? So for instance if you checked 64 angles simultaneously on 64 entangled particles at the destination would that be enough to be certain about the source particle's spin up or down and the angle it was measured at? Or is it still random and I am clutching at quantum straws.

    I realise that there is a vast amount of information I do not understand about these matters – just thinking aloud. So if any quantum physicists read this please reply with a polite – shut up idiot you do not know what you are on about. So I know I am not on the correct track.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2019 at 12:23 pm
    Permalink

    This might be the most intriguing unsolved mystery of science to me. I feel like solving this could solve almost everything else.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2019 at 8:49 pm
    Permalink

    I give up. Can someone convert me to radical religion instead

    Reply
  • October 7, 2019 at 11:09 pm
    Permalink

    The only "constant" in the particles is given to the particle by the observer…the measurement itself…aka The Observer Effect.
    The observer MUST give a value to the particle…until that moment in time…the particle does not have a definition (spin).
    Much like Schrodinger's Cat…until you look in the box…the cat is both alive & dead…and also neither alive or dead.
    So until the observer defines the particle's spin…one way or the other…it has both & neither spin direction(s).

    Reply
  • October 8, 2019 at 1:46 pm
    Permalink

    For an explanation of this "spooky action at a distance" I know two guys who propose something :
    -Nassim Haramein and the connected Universe conception : every proton is entangled not only to one or two other particles but to every proton in the Universe (I know it sounds crazy, and you haven't heard everything yet)
    -Ken Wheeler (Theoria Apophasis) who bases his explanation on Ether perturbations (Ether is the supposed medium which serves as the substrate for electromagnetic interactions, it is supposed to have been proven wrong by the Morley and Mickelson experiments in the late nineteenth century).

    Maybe some of you can be interested, I hope Veritasium checks them out too if he's not allergic to heretic science 😊

    Reply
  • October 9, 2019 at 3:09 am
    Permalink

    So what if the measurement is random? There's still a definite relationship between the two particles, even if it can't be used to transmit useful information.

    Reply
  • October 9, 2019 at 12:20 pm
    Permalink

    Particles of what?…photons, electrons, quarks, leptons etc.? Which ones do they use in the experiment?

    Reply
  • October 9, 2019 at 12:23 pm
    Permalink

    What!!!

    Reply
  • October 9, 2019 at 2:55 pm
    Permalink

    I think this does violate the theory of relativity, because you CAN send information faster than light using quantum entanglement, contrary to what has been previously said. Say you agree with a friend that if he gets mostly spin downs, you both meet up at Jupiter. Say you have then traveled far away from earth, and placed a spin detector where you are. After a few days, you want to meet up at Jupiter with your friend, so you set your spin detector to 60 degrees. This will make about 3/4 of all your particles spin up when you detect them. This means that your friend on earth will get about 3/4 of the time spin down. So he know to meet up on Jupiter. This information traveled faster than light, therefore violating the theory of relativity. This COULD be used to communicate over large distances instantly.

    If this means that you can infer another spin detector’s angle, instantly, you could take this a step further. You could assign letters to the amount of degrees rotation there is, and make an entire alphabet out of it.

    If all this is true, this could fundamentally change our understanding of physics.

    Reply
  • October 11, 2019 at 9:13 pm
    Permalink

    Yeah, Einstein's speed limit has been broken long ago by a series of experiments by the Soviet Union. I just wrote a comment about this on another subject but the took mother rabbits down in submarines, and thousands of miles away. Then, with extremely accurate clocks, (I need to look up what kind of clocks these were) but at the command of someone not directly involved, they'd kill the children bunnies, and the rabbits in the submarines had brain wave recorders on clocks synced with the surface clocks. The mother's brain waves recorded an absolutely simultaneous and abnormal spike at the time it's children were killed in some instantanious way so they could prove that they were not only connected by some means that was not understood but was also faster than light. Now, I'm not sure I believe the faster than light bit, but the simultaneous nature of the connection is intriguing. That's why I remember it. It's definitely not a physical connection. How was this event communicated? That's the weird thing. Many mother's report to just "knowing" when something happened to their child. So the rabbit experiment was triple blind and under the ocean at great depth and it was repeated on so many, and only the mother who's children were killed, would register this spike is brain waves and behavioral disturbance thereafter for some time. I'm not sure how long it took a rabbit to get over that trauma. But then they'd do it with the next rabbit. Those on the submarines had no idea when these events occured. They only reported their behavior in general. They didn't even know why they had rabbits aboard a submarine. So it's a very interesting repeated experiments, though very cruel, Do not try this at home. (Nor in your nuclear submarine.) But, is this an example of some type of communication that is somehow a practical example of quantum entanglement? We know at one time, the children of it's mother were produced in the same womb from cells grown within the mother. So there are molecules like DNA that were at one time, part of it's mother. I'm at a loss for words now. Something must explain this. Then there's this theory. Could they be linked? I don't think I'm smart enough to make an experiment that could decide this one way or another. It's just one of many fringe type phenomena that defy explanation even though the overall experiment is accepted, like remote viewing and maybe others, water dowsing? I'm not sure if there is a list of accepted, proven beyond all doubt, anyone could replicate, just replace the submarine with space, or just distance alone. That's fact. I read the remote viewing book in the 70s that was a breakthrough announcement at the time. The fact of it as a phenomenon is confirmed by science worldwide, and repeatable anywhere. The book explained how to do a scientific experiment while being double blind or more so it was written for the average person. I was a kid, so I learned about the process of science, partly by this book and the rigorous nature of a successful, nonpolluted experiment.

    Reply
  • October 11, 2019 at 10:09 pm
    Permalink

    Thumbs down! Give it up! Information is supernatural … outside of matter/energy. JESUS CHRIST = LOGOS of all information. One must understand he/she is a soul whose information enables quantum waveform collapse (into pure particle attributes of light). Such science proves (supernatural) knower (of the which-path information). Deal with it pseudo-science religious fundies.

    Reply
  • October 12, 2019 at 12:52 am
    Permalink

    It's a good video but it'd be better if a better explanation was given for what spin is and exactly how the detector that measures to spin works without that knowledge you can't really understand it. Or at least I can't.

    Reply
  • October 12, 2019 at 4:18 pm
    Permalink

    The supercomputer is going to bring down the whole nation and every continent and every person and every Creed and everything that you have ever seen

    Reply
  • October 12, 2019 at 10:51 pm
    Permalink

    Assume that I wrote a number to a paper. Than I copied it. Next I put these two papers in envelopes. At last I sent one of the paper to the moon. You don't know the number written the paper which is on the moon. If you read the paper (meaurement) you will know the number written on the paper. according to this teory these to paper communicates with each other.

    What is the difference between my story and the quantum entanglement?

    Reply
  • October 13, 2019 at 7:48 am
    Permalink

    What are entangled particles…… How can i find some……..

    Reply
  • October 13, 2019 at 3:37 pm
    Permalink

    "formed spontaneously from energy" time index 1:55;
    energy is expression of particle in motion; how could there be pure energy ;under what circumstances without pro rata particle? or matter? even if its anything like light; light is not energy;

    Reply
  • October 14, 2019 at 12:53 pm
    Permalink

    not quite sure i understand what u mean by particle spinning. i can only assume you mean spdf orbital spin electrons

    Reply
  • October 14, 2019 at 10:43 pm
    Permalink

    How do you even get entangled particles?

    Reply
  • October 15, 2019 at 8:47 am
    Permalink

    What if you measure one particle in two or three directions simultaneously?

    Reply
  • October 16, 2019 at 2:52 am
    Permalink

    its not 2 particles at all … its one particles with 2 positions in the physical universe. you have a situation where the two sides of the coin can walk astray seperately …. still one coin …. in a higher dimension

    Reply
  • October 16, 2019 at 6:30 am
    Permalink

    This is dirty

    Reply
  • October 16, 2019 at 6:33 am
    Permalink

    These particles act like my ex girlfriend

    Reply
  • October 16, 2019 at 12:13 pm
    Permalink

    confused, if you know your side is spin up, then the other side is spin down, couldn't you already perform faster than light communication between both points?

    Reply
  • October 16, 2019 at 7:12 pm
    Permalink

    wtf

    Reply
  • October 17, 2019 at 10:52 am
    Permalink

    But.. if two particles are entangled, and if we can control the spin of one then we can control the spin of the other. So, by observing the spin of the other particle we can know how the spin of the particle at the other end is being changed. Since these changes are instantaneous, we should be able to communicate faster than the speed of light. Am I wrong?

    Reply
  • October 18, 2019 at 5:08 pm
    Permalink

    I can possibly look into this guy's future self…..(when you look at him when he faces you he looks bald).

    Reply
  • October 19, 2019 at 3:16 pm
    Permalink

    Am I disable

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *