Quantum Entanglement and the Great Bohr-Einstein Debate | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios

About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery

1. when they put a particle in andromeda and his twin in the earth and all the properties become opposite then we can talk of Einstein being wrong... so of course we need to do a DNA test to the particles to probe that they are really twins and not just statictics probabilistics weird results at any random measured particle...
   the problem with statictics its that they allow all posible answers by a probability function... Quantum theory , like chords theory is just beyond the scientific method, because they are no experimental proves... its just maths methaphysics.
2. The way you explain things and give credit to each side for its evidence is absolutely amazing. Bravo.
   
   Personally, I've always been a big fan of the Copenhagen Interpretation. (So much so that even the 'interpretation' part is a little offensive. What do you mean?? I'm looking at the same results you are!)
   
   I know studies show that people are inherently skeptical of new information that violates their held-beliefs, and can become worse if you feed them more clashing info, until they shut down completely. So, I'm always trying to open myself up to other sides of the coin, different theories and "ahem"... interpretations.
   
   But... the way you explain it, makes it so easy. I thought there was only one way to explain non-locality, but looks like I'm dead wrong. In fact, one theory doesn't sound any more insane than the other anymore. Now I'm more on the fence than I ever have been before. Kudos.
3. Summery of video: NOTHING IS REAL
   PHYSICISTS ARE CLUELESS AND CANT SLEEP AT NIGHT
   NOTHING TRULY EXISTS UNLESS SEEN
4. I could not enter to the nerd night
5. The strange behavior exhibited by particles at the Quantum level is the result Space-Times not existing at the Quantum level.
6. What I'm hearing is. When you measure anything, you aline its pair. So, when you measure you change the measured part of the Universe from incoherent into coherent. Then, you have altered this part of the Universe into coherent, Not the true incoherent Universe. You are measuring an altered Universe.
   Quantum Physics is atomism, the standard model religion. Tesla was correct, the Universe is a field of dielectric ether.
7. the entanglement is a lie from the universe yes its there but its a cheat made via curvature ! if you got an old 1940 s big round and curved fender and a light perpedicular to the fender you can actually see entanglement! yes this happen if outside geometry is curved enough to still see both but not to small to not see it ! the limit ? point of view !so technicaly you could create a virtual entanglement with multiple point of view and calculate the various entanglement you need.but its still a cheat!
8. rofl! Einstein? he ignored the geometry of the field or the wave gees! what a farce! he applied a constant to everything without regard to geometry of the invisible and people are supposed to believe this? go tell that to electricity magnetism resonance and likely countless other! what you thing wave and field are only in almost 2 d? go see slowmoguy channel he did explosion of small toy in an aquarium and trust me there is Nothing 2 d in the field or the way gees and yes it does act at a distance so obviously eisntein( or more likely who ever asked Steinmetz to say this non sense to eisntein via the math correction is also wrong !
9. ok the prob thing could be there is just a lager civ that stops mask or
   destroys the probes that dont hide and my even replace what info was
   sent back to its old masters with ether real or false info
10. Yo, this shit is whack.
11. I don't think I fully understand this still. Help?
12. So what about the function of the eye itself and its influence on observations. The rods and cones in our eyes convert light waves into bio-chemical signals that our brains process. So what we see is only reflected light that happens to hit our eye ball and the entire spectrum of what we can detect with the eye is less than 1% of the entire light spectrum. So what if the reflected light that hits our eyes is changed by not only by the fact that we can only see light after its bounced off something, but by the the nature of its interaction with the eye ball itself? What i guess i am trying to say is what if it is sort of like a "beeka boo universe" but that the cause is not defined by the laws of physic's, but by the bio chemical process in our eye that we call sight. What if light goes from a wave to a particle when it hits our eyes? What if the universe is all a wave and sting theory and that its the eyes absorption of light that creates what appears to be paradoxical, but in reality is just like how we don't see the hole in our field of vision created by our optic nerve, but science has prove exists and that our brains just correct for it? Btw, we also see upside down and as the signal goes from our eye to our brain, our brains correct for that as well and its totally unnoticed, except that science and experiments have prove that is actually part of the way our eye sight actually works. So i guess its kinda of stoner logic slamming into a pubic school education. But the observer paradox's, might they not be biological instead of part of the field of physicists?? We know that the eye is really a pretty bad light detector, that it misses things, has holes and that things like eye dominance mean that what we see isn't exactly were we see it and that there is a few millisecond delay between the event and our brain processing it? We see only what we need to see and what we see is actually a few milliseconds in the past...so perhaps the answer lies in understand the eye ball better than we do and not in the math?
13. that is not how the baby thing works...epic fail...wow.
14. The thing about quantum entanglement that I don't understand is how physicists deduced that it exists and the mechanism by which it operates. Is there any empirical evidence to support it, or is it purely theoretical?
15. I get a bigger headache from people trying to explain away quantum behavior, than trying to understand it.
16. So the direction of spin one particle is known only when u measure it. And this will affect its entangled pair's spin as well.. But you won't know that the other particle has opposite spin unless you "measure" it as well. So why can't the second act of measuring collapse its wave function in such a way that the particles have opposite spin??
17. I bet even all the top physicists advocating a random holographic universe still secretly hope it'll turn out to be physical and deterministic
18. this should be the we teach Theory as fact Channel and people believe it cuz they're dumb YouTube channel
19. I'd like to see him cover photons and explain how they "travel" across space.
    My theory is that they don't "travel". They simply stay in position and "transfer" energy from one to another ACROSS space...
    Kind of like Newton's cradle. Imagine each ball being a photon.
    I can actually PROVE this theory using a "camera obscura" and a Newton's cradle. The concept is actually pretty simple if you actually watch a demonstration. In fact, a camera would not be able to work if it was not for my theory.
20. Albert Einstein thought every possible measurement outcome of a particle was encoded in it at the moment of creation. What he did not consider was that although locality may be violated, causality cannot, due to the fact that when a particle’s spin is measured, it instantly affects its entangled pair. This is what Niels Bohr thought, but he didn’t consider realism. He thought entangled pairs of particles existed as a wave function of all possible states, which is not true. Entangled pairs of particles possess definite spins even before they are measured and information travelling between them travels faster than the speed of light. The Theory of General Relativity is wrong.