🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 10:47:13 UTC No. 16635905
I've watched countless videos discussing quantum entanglement by "experts" and walked away with two different versions of it.
1. Measuring a single entangled particle will directly effect the spin of the other regardless of distance
2. They're just synchronized so it just "appears" that they're interacting when measured
So which one is true?
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 10:54:17 UTC No. 16635909
>>16635905
I have a spoon and a fork, I will give you one but you can't see which it is until you are very far away from me.
Okay now look. You got the fork.
Guess what I have?
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 10:55:33 UTC No. 16635910
It's partly both.
Measuring a particle collapses the wavefunction that describes both (entangled) particles - both particles are then no longer entangled and each have distinct wavefunctions. But no one knows if a wavefunction is actually a physical description of reality or just some math equations describing it.
The aren't synchronized, they are correlated. You can calculate the probability of making that measurement, you just can't know (or force) beforehand what that result will be.
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 10:57:27 UTC No. 16635911
>>16635909
zamn..
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 11:03:15 UTC No. 16635916
>>16635910
> But no one knows if a wavefunction is actually a physical description of reality or just some math equations describing it.
The best physical description of reality I could come up with is, a wavefunction is like a bubble of probably that grows over time, the particle is always present *somewhere* on the surface of that bubble with a probability of being observed. The probability trends to focus along the edge of the bubble in the direction that the particle was emitted, but it has a nonzero chance of being anywhere along that surface.
Of course this violates the speed of light if it can travel from one edge to the other instantly, but I don't think we can prove that happens and that it's not just zipping around the surface.
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 11:40:23 UTC No. 16635942
>>16635905
It a tensor product.
>Yeah, but can you make an analogy with diesel cars and poppy seeds.
No. Learn math.
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 13:10:42 UTC No. 16636031
>>16635942
how does one learn math?
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 13:31:34 UTC No. 16636047
>>16636031
start with the Greeks
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 13:41:07 UTC No. 16636051
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:04:18 UTC No. 16636061
>>16635916
wavefunction equations is like stock market equations, its not how universe works but statistics
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:38:53 UTC No. 16636128
>>16635909
So entanglement is just reification? Like the "movement" of shadows?
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 17:58:27 UTC No. 16636259
>>16636061
Correct, everything else is a lie.
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:26:16 UTC No. 16636546
>>16635905
its either 2 or they’re just paired up global variables
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:45:56 UTC No. 16636601
>>16635905
I read the first line of your thread and walked away with just the version where OP is retarded
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:52:29 UTC No. 16636615
>>16636601
Fuck I can't wait to see how anon comes back when the thread is near to getting archived
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 22:50:36 UTC No. 16636713
>>16635909
It doesn't work like that kiddo, depending on how he looks he will either see a fork or a spoon. You would need to see yours in the very same way he is looking to see the other.
Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 22:54:09 UTC No. 16636720
>>16636713
You are actively admitting you cannot operate beyond binary reasoning.
Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 03:12:22 UTC No. 16636951
>>16635905
it's #1
https://youtu.be/ZuvK-od647c?t=6m20