Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no cheating

Re:Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no... by securityfreak on Thursday October 22, 2015 @05:11AM (#10431195)

Could someone please explain, how can they know beforehand the other electron in the other diamond is the first one's "sister"? What if those two are NOT entangled and will have identical spins? What defines entangled electrons? Is it a must that once they were e.g. in the same atom? Thank you. (I only completed 2 basic University physics courses which isn't enough :D )

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no... by caf on Thursday October 22, 2015 @06:30AM (#10431430)

They use a process called "entanglement swapping" that allows you to create entanglement between two particles that have never interacted. It's described partway through this article:

http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2464

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no... by comboy on Thursday October 22, 2015 @06:31AM (#10431435)

This should make things more clear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuvK-od647c

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no... by securityfreak on Thursday October 22, 2015 @08:09AM (#10431714)

Thank you. It does explain what I was missing from the video.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Loophole-free Bell test ‘Spooky action at a distance’, no... by tim333 on Thursday October 22, 2015 @07:05AM (#10431510)

I think that if you had non entangled electrons you wouldn't get the 'spooky' result. You'd just get random electrons arriving without anything statistically significant of interest.

[ Parent | on HN ]