News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Einstein-Bohr debate settled once and for all by bluepnume on Saturday July 09, 2022 @04:07AM (#32032982)
If I have entangled particles A and B, and then B interacts with and becomes entangled with particle C, can that interaction not qualify as an "observation" that collapses the wave function of A + B and de-entangles them?
Re:Einstein-Bohr debate settled once and for all by dataflow on Saturday July 09, 2022 @04:10AM (#32033007)
Not as I understand it. I think of it as: A and B were correlated, and now you caused B and C to become correlated. That cannot possibly imply that A and C's correlation dropped to zero.

Or if you prefer to think of balls; if A hits B, and then B hits C, then C's future trajectory is still (forever) affected by what A was doing, as is the trajectory of anything else it hits.

Re:Einstein-Bohr debate settled once and for all by Jensson on Saturday July 09, 2022 @08:34AM (#32034452)
That is classical systems and "classical" probability. In quantum systems particle functions collapses all the time making parts of it go to zero. At least as we understand quantum mechanics today, the math we have doesn't explain experimental results without those collapses.
Re:Einstein-Bohr debate settled once and for all by dataflow on Saturday July 09, 2022 @09:28AM (#32034880)
Yes of course I know that's classical, I was just making an analogy to get the point across about correlations.