Conversation The Forum
Helper icon Helpers: Chris2mates , LLstill , PrincessFruitBat

About us

Midsummer's Eve is a free online dating community - based around friendship, real meetups, real people, and real relationships. We've been online since 1999 and have twice won Radio 2's Web Site of the Day award. So why not join us for free and join in the discussion?

Quantum entanglement theory.

1 2 3 4 Next >  Last >> 

A_man_called_CHIOG  Male  South East London 18-Nov-2018 08:36 Message #4728751
In quantum physics, entangled particles remain connected so that actions performed on one affect the other, even when separated by great distances. The phenomenon so riled Albert Einstein he called it "spooky action at a distance."

What’s all that about?
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 18-Nov-2018 09:04 Message #4728752
I think that at the 1841 annual meeting of mad scientists in white coats, they decided that putting the made up word 'quantum' in front of other words would make them look even madder, and so it came to be.

I think I may now go and have some quantum breakfast, and a quantum cup of tea.
wonderoushen  Female  Gwynedd 18-Nov-2018 10:18 Message #4728757
Its all weird shit that some people use to justify other weird shit whilst others try and deny it because it weirds their brains out to much.
Minnie-the-Minx  Female  Hertfordshire 18-Nov-2018 11:39 Message #4728761
Jung has his own thoughts on connectiveness even before then.
Jeff  Male  East Sussex 18-Nov-2018 11:49 Message #4728762

Most of quantum mechanics is weird. Some of its basic maths ideas aren't too difficult if you're familiar with probability, complex numbers (involving the square root of minus 1), and with calculus and/or matrices. But nobody understands what the maths means physically or what is actually happening - hence there are many interpretations of it, and David Mermin (often assigned to Richard Feynman) commanded "Shut up and calculate". However QM can be very useful, and coming developments include quantum computers (which are much faster than current computers), making unbreakable codes, and teleportation. (See thread "The Imitation Game Does it apply to Now?" )

Two tiny particles (such as photons) can be "entangled", for example, by being produced in the same process. Suppose Alice keeps one such particle and Bob takes the other one say millions of miles away. Then Alice does certain experiments on hers, and if Bob does the same experiment then he gets a related result, for example if Alice finds hers is spin "up" then Bob would get his as spin "down". (Here, "up" and "down" are not like gravitational directions.) But these particles are not already "up" and "down" - they are each in a state that is a combination of "up" and "down", and it is impossible to know what combination. In 1935 Einstein & Rosen & Podolsky wrote a paper saying that current ideas of quantum mechanics must be wrong because for Bob's particle and Alice's particle to have related results at the same time (or within a tiny fraction of a second) by sending a signal from Alice to Bob (or Bob to Alice) would violate the relativistic principle that signals cannot travel faster than light. The alternative is that each particle has embedded in it information that we cannot determine ("hidden variables") which control the results of future experiments. In 1964 John Bell calculated results of possible experiments to determine whether or not the "hidden variables" theory was correct. Such experiments showed that there are no hidden variables.

Nobody knows the mechanism by which entangled particles far apart produce related results.


QM started long after 1841.
Many fraudulent mediums (media?) claim that quantum mechanics proves their theories are correct. About 10 years ago I went to a spiritualist fair, and a mystic told a meeting that QM could determine one's lucky colour! Deepak Chopra fraudulently claims that his "quantum healing" is based on QM, but his descriptions of QM have errors.
Quantum is used to make things seem more scientific, such as Quantum dishwasher tablets.


QM predicts results of experiments correct to many decimal places. Most psychics can't even predict basic results to 1 decimal place. Most of QM is way above my level, but I don't think that the experts are frauds.
barney  Male  Surrey 18-Nov-2018 11:56 Message #4728763
That's that sorted. Next.
OTB  Male  Dorset 18-Nov-2018 12:35 Message #4728766

You're a wrong un of the highest order. You really are.


As for you, O.P

You take a fascinating topic but don't run with it.

WHY would you even bother mentioning the subject matter in an original post if you couldn't provide any information on the subject yourself?

A great potential topic ... abandoned at birth by the O.P.

Waste of an effing thread title. :-(
Jeff  Male  East Sussex 18-Nov-2018 13:53 Message #4728771

I didn't quote Wikipedia nor anything else. I have studied quantum mechanics for quite a long time, and this topic is an important part of QM.
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 18-Nov-2018 15:07 Message #4728775
I think I probably messed the thread up a bit, by taking the mick out of 'quantum'. I can't help it, it is what I do from time to time. Taking the mick that is, not quantum.

Many years ago, someone at a 'gathering' told me they were a quantity surveyor. For some reason I mistook quantity for quantum, and thought they were a mad scientist. They did look like one. They would have been good at quantum, I'm sure.

The same when someone has 'particle' in their job title. Like particle physicist or something. They always look like a particle physicist should look. They were designed for the job.
A_man_called_CHIOG  Male  South East London 18-Nov-2018 17:24 Message #4728787
Tumbleweed. It’s good to add a bit of humour and I posted with that in mind as not many people understand the subject even though OTB probably pretend to.

Jeff. Good post. I find it a fascinating subject with many differing theories and explanations.

OTB. Perhaps it is you who is the waste of space but I doubt you take your head out of your backside long enough to understand what a boring, pompous, big headed twat you really are.
BlackMark1  Male  Leicestershire 18-Nov-2018 17:33 Message #4728788
I agree it is a fascinating subject which I wouldn’t pretend to understand but no doubt an important subject for the scientific minds studying quantum physics.
It looks as if chiog touched a nerve with poor old OTB who was unnecessarily rude but maybe OTB felt out of his depth on such a subject.
AndyMacG  Male  the West Midlands 18-Nov-2018 17:51 Message #4728790
Ahhh Chiog but would that be a quantum backside his head is stuck up? lol

Andy Mac
Sea Urchin  Female  Essex 18-Nov-2018 21:12 Message #4728798
I found this a very interesting post and do not fully understand, but do sometimes like to attempt to understand that which can sometimes be a little puzzling. Good to read posts that put this over in a more simplistic and easier to understand way, as well as those that add a touch of humour.
NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 18-Nov-2018 23:36 Message #4728801
OTB felt out of his depth on such a subject

He could always post the subject again, and show that he does understand the subject.
Studying the subject should keep him quiet for a while.

warmundeft  Male  Wrexham 19-Nov-2018 09:39 Message #4728816
Crikey Chiog! You do present some posers - hope you have some half-way decent leads towards answers as well.

It took me two goes to get my head around gyroscope theory, so the ideas surrounding quantum mechanics just baffles my sense of how I perceive things to be. The ideas overwhelm my grey cell.

Now Jeff presents information pretty lucidly and plausibly, and all without a mention of the state of health of Schroedinger's cat (sorry Erwin, no umlauts available) or Heisenberg's indecision. I do however, get a sense of finding the unexpected, as if book covers and pages had been shuffled.
Wouldn't be surprised if that mystic claimed knowledge of quantum chromo-dynamics.

Although the timing doesn't work, I wonder if this is the sort of subject Lewis Carroll had in mind when he had the Red Queen imagining six impossible things before breakfast?

Ah well, back to the Big Boys Book of Hard Sums.
Victoriana11  Female  Buckinghamshire 19-Nov-2018 10:17 Message #4728820
I am feeling a bit left out here... think I'll pop back into the kitchen where its all very familiar and meaningful to me.

Lol V x
wonderoushen  Female  Gwynedd 19-Nov-2018 10:47 Message #4728829
OTB, CHIOG asked what it was about, meaning he dosen't understand it properly and would maybe like an explaination in everday language and one that you can't look up on wikipedia, I agree with you by the way people should attribute thier quotes, then others can check them out too. I've got to say I'm not sure how much anyone really understands quantum entanglement.
tsunamiwarrior  Male  Hertfordshire 19-Nov-2018 12:27 Message #4728843
If every thread that had a question or put forward a subject for discssion also had the OP provide all the answers it would be a boring old world!

The theories surrounding quantum entaglement are interesting even if you don't fully understand them and how many people honestly do understand them? It sounds as even Einstein was sometimes a bit puzzled and he had the knowledge and the hair to know most things.
Andromeda  Female  Berkshire 20-Nov-2018 16:58 Message #4728904
OTB felt out of his depth on such a subject

He could always post the subject again, and show that he does understand the subject.
Studying the subject should keep him quiet for a while.

He might not have a knowledge of quantum but he does write some interesting posts. Very Mills and Boon but I like all the romance.
OTB  Male  Dorset 20-Nov-2018 17:49 Message #4728906
I apologise.

I read Jeff's post and, checking online, noted that his explanation included the "Alice and Bob" example lifted straight from Wikipedia.

It really was.

Jeff wrote his comments without clarifying that his comments were lifted from that online resource, inferring (in my view) that he was simply plagiarising Wiki.

I'm sorry my frustration expressed itself in the way it did and, sure, I should have just bit my lip and offered my own thoughts.

It was also wrong of me to criticise the O.P’s original post … or the style in which he presented it.

I’m sorry, CHIOG.
Jeff  Male  East Sussex 20-Nov-2018 18:46 Message #4728908

Again you are stating a complete falsehood, so yet again WH gets a false impression of my posts. Whenever I quote something, I put it in quotes and I state the source. I have studied QM, and I did not not copy or lift any part of my post from anywhere. So if you don't apologise to me clearly for shouting (in capitals) that I copied it, then hypocritically it is you who are a wrong 'un. You have previously repeatedly shown your great ignorance and confusion about simple physics, and your fondness for falsely insulting me.

Alice and Bob are conventional names in many books and articles and videos in the subject. In thread "The Imitation Game" that I mentioned, on 20-Sep18 at 12:44 I wrote "Using conventional names, if Alice send Bob ... eavesdropper Eve". And on 22-Sep-18 at 13:36 I wrote about how Einstein was wrong.

I've never read this nor been told it, but I suspect that quantum entanglement could become one of the most important aspects of engineering, and I was appalled that you didn't like the subject to be raised.
OTB  Male  Dorset 20-Nov-2018 19:27 Message #4728913
Thanks for that, Jeff.

Now I’ll offer my contribution in my own ‘Beachy’ words, from memory not internet trawling. :-)


The world we think we live in bares little resemblance to REALITY, as the mysterious world of quantum physics often shows us.

I start this conversation by reminding myself that the comprehension of our interpretation of the world, without, relies upon whatever signals or electronic pulses are received by our brains inside our skulls, within where 3lb of organic brain matter processes such signals.

Point being; Our brains take “outside” data from our sensors, (our eyes, our ears, our taste buds, or our fingertips or skin), and PROCESSES such signals to create an approximation, a simulation, a rendering … of what is, presumably, happening “OUT THERE” … outside of the enclosed, entirely silent, entirely black void that our brains inhabit.

We can’t ever know what REALITY actually looks or feels like. We rely, rather, on a limited, small bandwidth of sensory information … to create, (or rather), re-create what we assume is … a certain approximation of reality.

And in the scheme of things, the human perception of the world is merely a fraction of what is really going on “out there” … in the same way that, back in the 16th century, Galileo’s telescope was only able to view singular specks of light representing some (local) stars in our universe.

Today, thanks to infrared, ultra-violet, radio telescopes and computing algorithms, Galileo’s simple pinpricks of (star) light can be examined, (filtered) to reveal several layers of information, (starlight, galactic dust, various gases, various elements) … and the result is a far more, comprehensive “picture” of much more than a mere 16th century view of the night sky.

Mind-blowing photography from the Hubble telescope REVEALS a complex, high definition, multi-layered view of our perceived universe that makes Galileo’s early representation of the universe look like a picture produced by the crayons of a 5-year-old!

The discovery (or discipline) of quantum physics does exactly the same thing with regards to the real, true, makeup of the physics of reality and the true complexity of matter and said universe … including “stuff” that falls way, way outside of our own simple human perception of reality.

Quantum Entanglement

To us humans, we regard things as being made up of particles. (Tiny little objects). Further, we find it difficult to imagine one object to be in two places at once … but they can be!

I’ll relate my understanding (not explanation) of quantum entanglement … and, by adding the words ONE or ZERO, explain why quantum entanglement could be the most profound human discovery ever realised … but only IF we can effectively make use of the principle!
OTB  Male  Dorset 20-Nov-2018 19:29 Message #4728914
When two subatomic particles interact, they can become ENTANGLED, with their SPIN or their POSITION linked … (Human’s don’t know how), BUT … if we can determine, (or change) the spin of one of the particles, we can affect the spin of the other … even if one of the particles is at the other end of the universe from its partner.

There could be all sorts of discoveries or benefits in understanding what is going on (including faster than light communication) but I’ll stick with COMPUTING for now.

Computers use digital technology at present where either a switch is ON or OFF, (A one or a zero) and this binary phenomenon has enabled our 21st-century computing world.

Quantum entanglement offers humans the prospect of creating computing power of a magnitude entirely off the scale where a switch can be ON, OFF or NEITHER or BOTH.

As previously related, (above), such a technology could have a profound effect on humanity … or further enhance the artificial intelligence on the cusp of replacing us!

Is my explanation similar to others?

Yes … but I’ve explained it in my own words :-)
Jeff  Male  East Sussex 20-Nov-2018 20:31 Message #4728934
And yet again you falsely indicate that I didn't use my own words.
NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 20-Nov-2018 21:08 Message #4728936
Yes Jeff but he did apologise earlier.
Why not make a copy and frame it, put it on the mantlepiece.

1 2 3 4 Next >  Last >> 

Back to top  Back to top

Help with conversations Help with conversations »