:geordi-no: Double slit results happen because there's no way to measure something without interacting with it, and any interaction with a massless particle is going to have a sizeable effect on its position and/or momentum
:geordi-yes: Double slit results happen because photons are just shy and don't like it when people look at them
RE: that first one; from what I understand it's not a measurement problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory
The best explanation I've heard was some stuff I didn't understand about the Fourier transform.
I think measurement would still play a part though, 'cause even if hidden variables are at play, our methods of taking measurements are still limited to the QM equivalent of ramming cars into each other in order to find their position, momentum, etc., which are obviously going to have an effect on any hidden variables the may be at play.
Also, these comments are starting to get a bit meta, 'cause you're arguing for Hidden Variable Theory, meanwhile @Saint was arguing for Bell's Theorem which is supposed to be used to disprove the existence of hidden variables. So people are now arguing for contradictory QM theories under a meme about how no one understand QM lol.
I'm arguing against hidden variable, measurement problem is a way of explaining that there is a concrete, pre-determined state, but we can't tell what it is because our measurements affect the result.
We can account for the measurement problem by doing lots of tests and statistical analysis.
Here's an explanation of how that's tested and the implications: https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/experiments/EPR/
Ah, ok. Your original comment didn't make that clear (to me at least).
We're gonna find out where the truck is by dropping 3 tons of boulders in its path
consciousness is just our turn with the chemical reaction that is the entirety of the universe. ORRRRR the universe is this giant confusing ball with no sense and its rapidly chaotically expanding into nothing (???) and nothing means anything there is no real etc.
Your username and post reminded me of a "research paper" I read when I was like 13 that definitely claimed that teleportation was real using "Quantum Mechanical tunneling" by saying they used "spooky action at a distance"
IIRC, "Spooky action at a distance" was a phrase used by Einstein to describe quantum entanglement, which is basically when two or more particles have quantum states that are dependent on one another, even when they are moved great distances from one another, hence the "at a distance" part. The "spooky" part comes from the fact that one would think they shouldn't be able to instantly communicate info about their states to one another at such distances, but they do (or at least seem to).
Quantum tunneling is something different. Quantum particles are represented by a wave function that can be used to give the probability of finding a particle at a certain position. The wave function is dependent on the type of energy potential (or lack thereof) that the particle exists inside of, and changes its behavior at the boundaries between regions of different potentials. Quantum tunneling is what happens when a particle doesn't have enough energy to go over the "top" of a potential energy well, but it's wave function through the boundary of the well is such that there's still some probability that the particle could be found outside of the well. Basically, tunneling is what you get when a potential energy barrier is small enough that there's a slight chance the particle could travel all the way through before the barrier forces it back inside.
Wondering who wrote this "research paper," 'cause neither of these things are teleportation lol.
Edit: A good metaphor for tunneling would be like riot cops kettling protestors, with the cops being the potential energy barrier and the protestors being particles. If you were to try and escape the kettle by brute forcing your way through the wall of cops, it would be very hard. But since the wall of cops isn't actually a solid object, it's still technically possible to get through them if you're able to squeeze through quick enough, though the likelihood of an individual pushing all the way through and escaping is going to be highly dependent on how thin the wall of cops is.
The problem with lay descriptions of spooky action at a distance is they usually describe it in a way that doesn't make at all clear why you'd think there's any action at a distance at all. The classic example of entanglement is you take two particles, and have them interact with each other in such a way that they'll be spinning in opposite directions. Then, without observing which way either is spinning, you separate them over a long distance. At that point, you look at one of the particles, and at almost exactly the same time, somebody else looks at the other particle. You'll both always see them spinning in opposite directions, even if you make your observations so close together that they'd have to be sending a signal between them faster than the speed of light to communicate.
Well, so what? You could do exactly the same thing by separating a pair of shoes. If one person sees a left shoe, the other person will always see a right shoe. There extra ingredient in quantum mechanics is that the particle's spin is undetermined until somebody observes it. The obvious answer to which is: Why would I believe that? Just because you don't know which way it's spinning doesn't mean that there's not some predetermined answer before somebody observes it. And at that point the answer generally comes back: "No, it's not that, trust me lol."
To go beyond that you need to explain Bell's theorem, which is difficult to describe in a layman friendly way. The best explanation I've seen involved lights and boxes- there's a version at https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem but it's not as clear as the one I remember (which unfortunately I can't find)
Just because you don’t know which way it’s spinning doesn’t mean that there’s not some predetermined answer before somebody observes it.
I think part of why it's significant regardless is that identical Fermions (ex: electrons) can't exist in the exact same state as one another, as in you can't have 2 electrons occupy the same atomic orbital subshell with the exact same spin. If the electrons are going to be existing with one another, then they have to have opposite spins, otherwise their wavefunctions would equal zero, meaning they wouldn't exist. But for two electrons that aren't in the same state, then it doesn't matter, they can have either spin state regardless of what the other one is doing.
So by separating two entangled electrons apart, then it should follow that their spin states should be completely arbitrary relative to one another. So you should have states where both are measured to be in spin up or spin down states as well as in opposite spin states. But they're only ever measured to be in opposite states, as if they're still obeying the rules that identical fermions must follow when they try and occupy the same state, despite being far enough away from each other that those rules shouldn't apply.
(Also, I'm just an undergrad and we really haven't covered entanglement, so this is just my rough, and quite possibly wrong, interpretation of why it's important.)
TL:DR: I guess the significance is that while the act of entangling two electrons will necessarily cause them to adopt spins opposite from one another, once you separate them out the relationship that caused them to adopt those opposite spins shouldn't apply anymore. But measurements show that they continue to obey that relationship right up until they're measured.
Edit: Made sure to specify that the rules for Fermions only apply when they're identical/indistinguishable from one another.
Heh, to be honest I can't remember a lot of that! But you're right, Bell's Theorem isn't the only expalantion for why entanglement is "spooky", since Einstein said that long before the theorem even existed. But I think it's the simplest approach for explaining to a lay audience without a lot of extra ideas or "you just gotta believe me on this bit." And I think it's what definitively killed local hidden variable theories.
Damn. He opened himself up for questions, and you just went straight to asking him to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity lol.
Am physicist. If anyone tells you they understand quantum mechanics, they definitely don’t.
