Electron Spin, Quantum Physics View

If you can explain this, then Pi is a piece of cake in Schro. EQ.

Now, suppose we separate the two electrons by a long distance, then measure the spin of electron 1. We will find it to be either up or down, with say a 50% chance of each outcome. Suppose it has spin up. Then, it turns out that no matter how far away electron 2 is, it will instantaneously be found to have spin down. But the result for electron 1 was not determined until we measured it, so how did electron 2 know to be the opposite? Can this be explained or is it part of the spookiness of Q.M.?

Hi,

There are two possible explanations:

1) The spins are correlated from the beginning and it is just the way they are measured that appears to be spooky. When they are measured they may be rotated to the measuring position. This implies they are within a hemisphere of the measuring position.Then the second particle is in the other hemishphere and can be rotated to the opposite position, or give a null measurement.

2). There is a field connection between the two particles (possible a potential scaler/vector/vector spin field) that allows FTL signals. Thus, when one is measured a signal (possible a spin wave or torsion wave signal) is sent to the other and this signal destorys the field connection.

z

Hi thezman,

I have not been to this site because of reading the comments from thezman and Good Elf was hard to pass by. I was looking for a spark in Entanglement,

Truly my best regards.
yquantum

thezman

Please excuse me for not explaining on one point, is that the two detected photons are not remote from each other; they both share the same states. Thus, the seeming contradiction with relativity is avoided. It becomes a double edge sword in QM. no wonder they do not want to be friends.

We have been dealing with this in QM for decades it seems. Layman, Theologians, Philosophers, Scientists, and Physicists of QM what to find the Holy Grail. But like Good Elf mentioned it will be awhile on Super Strings which right now, I am in denial. But Entanglement could hold the key.

My concern is that it is so simple that it will set us all back one day. One tries to be analytical, develop a sound theory which could take years and then spends a decade trying to prove it wrong because if you want your project to continue you do not want to be perceived as ?.

Only the giants can say what might be thinking and get away with it, because of genius, tenure, or they can have great editors.

Best regards,
Ron


Cheers,
yquantum

The problem with explanation 1 is that in two entangled particles, there must be hidden variables, which quantum theory insists is wrong- there are no hidden variables.

The problem with explanation 2 is that the signal would travel faster than the speed of light, which upsets the relativists.

So either the entangled particles really are hiding something (and the spookiness is really just in the measurement, and the QM theorists are just spooking themselves) or the signal is passing through a hidden dimmension a la string theory, or a relativistic worm hole.

Occams razor would choose hidden variables. I don't have the mathematical understanding of QM to say it, so I won't.

Of course, this is the whole reason for exploring string theory.

Hi fausinator,,

If I may, let me ask you a question? We know that this paradox has been going on for many years in the Physics community, correct?

I do not need to know your back ground, and please not asking, but you have raised a issues that have been discussed in the pub, social gatherings, and labs during a break from work. (And that is if we have to much time on our hands, which most of the time we do not!)

Question: Could it be possible it is not hidden, we just do not have the technologies to explore the atom to see it's true nature (or mechanics) so we must live with the laws in QM until, the time arrives and we will have the ability?

I do not mind saying this, I do not know!

This spooky phenomena, does it not bother you? I will just quote the man who had such a deep mental capacity to go where few have be able to go and comprehend the true nature of physics !

Did not help much, but as intelligent, as I believe you to be - I am sure you did not expect an answer! Right?

Best regards,
yquantum

Hi,

No matter what theories are violated, it appears to me there are still only the two general possibilities. Either the spins are correlated a priori from the beginning, or there is some type of subtle connectivity between the particles.

There is, however, a third way to look at the problem. The two particles could really just be a single system (one particle), that breaks in two when measured (its wave function collapses to a two particle system). In this way the signal from one side of the system to the other is totally internal and FTL here may not violate relativity since the signal does not travel through space but through the internal structure of the single system.



z

HI,

Seen something like this before, it would be hard to dispute any theory during this stage in our development of understanding of QED.

thezman,
The situation is even stranger than what you have said. The real problem is the wave packets will carry angular momenta in opposite directions. And the direction in which they are emitted is entirely indeterminate. If this is true and I believe it is, then the wave functions of the wave, actually overlaps everywhere! So the annihilating (collapses) the electron-positron pair constitute a sort of antenna, (just for a kind of image), which is capable of radiating in any direction. >(I cannot cancel the FTL, at this point.)

I can see this, because of interference, (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle), it's not radiating in just two directions, in fact (we can cover that later if you like) yes I would love to contain it to just one direction and dimension but I cannot, then when you collapses the wave, would it not be found to be isotropic? Not just one trajectory but, x^n.

Best regards,
yquantum ,

Hi yquantum,

When elves have an epiphany then they are unable to see anything without that event influencing any answers they give. As you know I have been taken with Aharonov-Bohm Effect. So please forgive me if I see everything in this "light".

First a quantum "realism" explanation. This is wrong... then I will eventually "show" it is actually right later. Or I will wave my arms very rapidly to convince you of my veracity.

What if the electrons were little electric balls "spinning" at high speed. Then the balls will have an axis of rotation and the "balls", being solid electric charge constitute a "circulating" current. So these are now little "bar" magnets being equivalent to solenoids. Bring two of these "things" near, then they will align parallel and anti-parallel. That's just what magnets do best. Why don t they come close to each other and touch? This is because they are similarly charged (electrons are all negatively charged) so as they approach each other due to their mutual "magnetic" attraction they are also repulsed by the repulsive forces of the two negative charges. So in an orbital they "keep their distance" being electrostatically repelled but they align due to the two "bar magnets" attracting each other. This sort of explains space quantization and spin pairing in one foul swoop.

Now some may say that electrons have no "extension" in space to allow this magnetic effect to be occurring. Well... what if inside the curved spacetime of the electron there really is some kind of spin (I have mentioned before about relativistically spinning objects having a different dimensionality due to relativistic length contraction ) - the faster something rotates near the speed of light the shorter the circumference becomes the further you are from the center of the particle. Lets just say dimensionally it is "partially" closed. The influence of that spinning charge is not felt outside because the charge or whatever does not extend in space due to spacetime "closure".

What say it extends itself into the external space using the Aharonov-Bohm Effect. If this is the case then this explains why we can't see the charge extension but the influence is "universal" and FTL and is the result of spacetime dislocation as shown by other practical experiments. There is your connection. The spin pairing is then "classical" and due to a "proto-electromagnetism".

I realize this is not the whole answer but you must also admit the possibility that other theories are also wrong, even established ones, misleading us about this "stuff". In other words you might not be able to get there from here. Dump one idea then accept another idea to solve the problem. In this case to cut the gordian knot of the origin of charge.

To help you with this problem I am going to pass you to Roger Penrose who stated this month that Einstein is Right and QM is wrong.
Roger Penrose battles with quantum physics
I know you have seen this but others may not have seen it here.

You know me... I am hopeless on this one.

Cheers.

Hi Good elf,

It may be that the point particle electron is something like this.

A magnetic point monopole with a dipole field emanating from the point with intrinsic magnetic spin. This intrinsic spin represents the magnetic vector potential field which is itself essentially a vector spin field. Around this is a dual spherical symmetry representing the mass and charge aspects, with the mass aspect having also an intrinsic spin due to a vector spin field responsible for intrinsic angula momentum.

About Penrose. He has been saying for many years that the unification of QM and GR will require a change in QM rather than a change in GR. I think they both have to change, at least in the interpretation of the math formalism.

z

Hi y quantum,

I don't know if what you said ias actually correct. Although the angular momentum direction is said to be arbitrary, I believe that the direction of emission of the photons depends only on the collision trajectories of the electron and positron.

The two photons have equal and opposite angular momenta, no matter what the direction, since the angular momenta of the two original particles is also annihilated.

z

Hi Good Elf and thezman,

thezman,

My intent is not to disprove your theory, in fact I want what you want, GOOD PHYSICS. So I am not saying you are wrong and I am right. We just do not know at this time in our history, but I believe we are so very close I hope and pray. And I am not talking about me, maybe you guys!

This is dangerous, but if my memory serves me right and that is a challenge. You will find what you said in "Advanced Quantum Mechanics, pp. 211,212, Addison-Wesley."

thezman,

I have taken another path, no pun intended here. "Feynman's Path Integral Method," it does not disagree with QM in fact it is completely consistent with it, it just is a different or alternative version of QM. QED in summary, it does not invoke probabilities, or does it suggest collapse of the wave function on measurement, instead it leaves out particles and uses paths, which carry phase form point to point (you can jump all over that one later). You could say it encompass all space, what a reach eh! "Sum of Histories" and it does interact with our world and not just in a lab. Look at how he views Snell's Law. That is what I am trying to achieve in my journey not to be like" Feynman", they only come every millennium.

Not GUT, TOE, just a way to work out problems that are so unintuitive.

Good Elf,

Oh by the way thanks, we did have fun, must work now they have put a (delete-0) on all leave for a while. Now back to what we were talking about.

Not saying you are wrong on this, just different, and when you exchange thoughts with such intelligence men one must be careful.

Remind me on this one, point particle does not appear explicitly in the wave equation. I cannot remember any physical mechanism that is proposed to explain the probability distribution assume, or is it clear how to attach a phase, a natural characteristic of waves, to a point particle. (Schrodinger's Equation is all that comes to mind right now!) Psi , Are you saying the electric balls "spinning" at high speed, are points in a wave, what law is in use here? ( I just added this, had a break)

So that I understand and I do not, slow I quess, so there is no phase or particle in this idea, in the conventional way!

I know it is maybe a bit out of phase, but there is a reason for all this madness guys. To much cold but this is what came to me on the way down the slopes of physics. Watch out for the bolders and trees! HA! Now that is real........

Best regards guys,
yquantum

Hi Good Elf,

I ran across something, but I need to know what direction you are going with the _Aharonov-Bohm Effect _, 55% on this, but turn up the heat just a little.

Best regards,
yquantum

Hi yquantum,

The major problem I have with Feynman's sum over paths method is that it allows, no necessitates, paths that travel in a reverse temporal direction. Unless we live in a virtual reality, I don't think that time travel is possible, even on the quantum level.

z

Hi thezman,

Must hurry, I know I do not need to respond immediately but I want to on this

. I received a thread notification from one person, then you came up and while I was getting ready to answer you, another came up. I want to think on this, we know it works in QED. typo

But let me ask you this, will try and get with the others later,does not the spooky phenomena, entanglement, etc.fall into the theories of the QM, unintuitive packet?

Best regards,

I would like to continue this, if time allows,

yquantum