You can’t get entangled without a wormhole

Re:You can’t get entangled without a wormhole by flebron on Saturday December 07, 2013 @06:45PM (#6868258)

If that's all there was to entanglement, we would just use the term "ignorance of the actual state". The issue with entanglement is that the system will show properties of being in _both states at once_, which is distinct from being in one unknown state, which is your analogy. There's really no classical analogy that I know of that correctly fits entanglement in QM.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You can’t get entangled without a wormhole by frede on Saturday December 07, 2013 @07:29PM (#6868392)

Entanglement arises from the mix of mutual exclusive states and superposition. Superposition of two states is what is missing in the classical world.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You can’t get entangled without a wormhole by mck- on Saturday December 07, 2013 @07:22PM (#6868368)

The most-cited analogy would be Shrodinger's Cat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You can’t get entangled without a wormhole by yk on Saturday December 07, 2013 @08:39PM (#6868606)

I would call being in both states at once a quantum phenomenon, which has not much to do with entanglement.

[ Parent | on HN ]