Quantum Entanglement and Bell’s Theorem Essay

In the early twentieth century, physicists were in need of a new hypothesis to describe the realism of the atom and its comp whiznts. Newtonian mechanism and Einsteins surmise of surmisal of relativity worked real well at describing the motion of the planets and stars, but when these theories were applied to the atom, they tout ensemble broke down. Max Planck discovered that atoms exchange energy in soulfulness packets of specific energy values. Planck c tout ensembleed these energy packets quanta, Latin for unit of quantity, accordingly the name quantum theory.Two pi 1ers of quantum theory, Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrodinger, devised mathematical formulas to describe the atom. Two fundamental principles of quantum mechanics emerged from their equations the uncertainty principle and the principle of superposition. Superposition states that an atom exists in all possible states until it is measured. The uncertainty principle says that you buttocksnot know a quantum pa rticles location and impulse (momentum is a particles velocity,roughly) at the same time.These principles ar important because they reduce predictions of personal objects position from an absolutes to only a range of probabilities. This is very different from the certainty of serious music physics. The strangest phenomenon predicted, however, is quantum network. It predicted that when a particle is split in two, it behaves as if it were still joined, no matter how far they are fall ind. compound one of the entangled particles and the other re bets instantly. These strange properties described by quantum mechanics were unacceptable to Einstein and many other physicists.Einstein felt that quantum theory itself moldiness be a flawed theory to produce much(prenominal) strange predictions. The bizarre behavior and properties of the atom and sub-atomic particles must be credited(predicate) to some other mechanisms, he reasoned. Niels Bohr, another pioneer of quantum theory, defle cted Einsteins criticisms and claimed that quantum theory was a sound theory. The problem, Bohr said, was that we need an entirely new coif of words and terminology for the theory because the realm of the atom was so different from our everyday experiences.In 1935 Einstein, along with Boris Poldolsky and Nathan Rosen, submitted a famous paper outlining their criticisms of quantum mechanics titled Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered stand in? . The EPR paper, as it is known, included an idea for an experiment that would tribulation and prove who was right, classical physics or quantum mechanics. The test, however, was not thought possible. For 30 years the reason between the classical and quantum views continued.Physicist John Bell brilliantly devised a executable experiment involving entanglement victimisation individual photons, light filters, and photon detectors. He calculated two sets of equations that predict the results one using classic al mechanics, the other using quantum theory. The predictions of classical and quantum theories give very different results. The theory that matches the experimental entropy must be the correct theory. It would not be until 1980 that the technology existed to make out Bells experiment. I am going to greatly modify how the experiment works for clarity.When a photon is split, each photon retains complementary properties of one another. That is, if a photon starts as AB, the individual halves of the photon become A and B (B is complementary to A and evil versa). If we measure one of the split photons as being A, the other must be B. In the experiment, the photon is split and the individual photons race through a path in opposite directions. They each go through a filter that polarizes the photons. apparently put, polarization orients the photon in a certain direction.Imagine the photon as a sphere with a pole through it marking as northwestward or south. Polarization flips the di rection of the pole. So, polarized light becomes either up (north) or down (south). In this case, the complement of up is down and vice versa. Our photons can be labeled A up or B down A down or B up depending on how the filter polarizes it which is completely random. If we were to send a pair of photons on separate and opposite directions without a filter, no polarization happens and the detectors would register A on one and B on the other invariably.Add the filters, and the detectors register A up,B down,B up, or A down. Since the filters completely randomize each photons polarization, one detector could indicate an A up and the other could detect an B up for the same set of split photons, right? The Bell tests show that when when one detector registers A up, the other detector shows a B down. Its not surprising the As are opposite to the Bs, its that their polarizations are always complementary, or opposite. How does the other photon know what the other polarization will be and a ct accordingly?Are they still connected someways? If not, does one photon somehow send information about its state to the other photon so it can act accordingly? If the photons do somehow communicate, the information they send must travel much faster than the speed of light and violate a fundamental physical law. Whatever the case, it shows our understanding of the universe is incomplete. Bell was a proponent of Einsteins view of reality and didnt conduct quantum theory to be proven right. After witnessing a confirmation of his theory he said I have seen the impossible done.The phenomenon of entanglement has been demonstrated in experiment after experiment and progressively separating the photons at greater distances. Recently in Vienna, an even more stringent test was completed by Professor Anton Zellinger. The tests have sent split photons from one island to another many kilometers away and had the same eerie result. Our whole exposition of fundamental reality has to be revised. After the latest confirmation of quantum theory in Vienna, Dr. Zellinger and his colleagues posted a help wanted. They are seeking a philosopher to help understand the profound implications.