Can Particles be Quantum Entangled Across Time? 

I keep being impressed by how precise Brian describes everything when he formulates the questions. He never oversimplifies too much. It's great

This is better than anything on streaming services right now and Brian Greene is dropping 🔥🔥🔥 for FREEEE

Elise is a brilliant science communicator!

Brian Greene is one of the best Science communicators ever!

I believe that our brains are quantumly entangled through time!!!

"Elise Crull received a B Sc (Honors) in Physics & Astronomy from Calvin University, and holds an M.A. in Philosophy and Ph.D in History and Philosophy of Science from the University of Notre Dame. Before coming to City College, Dr. Crull held post-doctoral fellowships at the University of Aberdeen and at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, conducting research into the historical and philosophical foundations of quantum mechanics. In addition to history and philosophy of science, Crull frequently ponders (sometimes aloud in front of audiences) philosophical problems associated with quantum theory: the quantum-to-classical transition, quantizing gravity, understanding quantum causal models, the metaphysical nature of entanglement (including temporal entanglement!) and, as of late, interpreting the alternate quantum formalisms used in quantum computing. She also has the occasional thought about quantum cosmology. While these questions keep Prof. Crull in conversation with physicists, she also loves a good metaphysics chin-wag. Topics of special interest there include ontology, meta-ontology, and mereology. Since her research interests are fundamentally interdisciplinary, Crull often finds herself engaging with related "meta" issues, such as the ethics of emergent techno-science, science in the public sphere/ in education, and the nature of the science-theology-philosophy triad."

I love Dr Crulls energy. Super excited. Like me trying to explaine the new videos at work lol. Thank you both greatly

"Undulating waves of probability." That line tripped me out a little.

Elise Crull is an excellent teacher!

I have read his books , but Greene in this program is even better along with his colleagues. How great is it to have access to such programming!

Thank you for all you do Dr. Greene!

Excellent discussion!

That was enlightening and wonderful all at once! Great questions and great responses!!

What epic timing. Last one week I have been researching about black holes and quantum entanglement, even accidently watched the show 3 body problem which had quantum entanglement in it.

I would say yes.. if we imagine time like waves from droplet Round or like a ocean current maybe.. its connected throughout time yes? An maybe the past resonates through time. Having a littel hard wrapping my mind around it but think theres something to be said about the theory?

I love the way my brain explodes when you talk about quantum entanglements reaching through time . Thankyou ❤

5:06 This is the best description of Quantum Mechanics, that explains exactly, the relation between the "everyday" perception of the reality and the scientific approach to the "real" reality, the scientific perception of the world! Dear Professor Mr. Brian Greene, thank you, so much for this. I think this description is what we all (the amateur scientists), need to have in our minds to be thinking more "clear", about all this. And thank you Elise Crull, you are presenting the Quantum World with the philosophical background we all the amateur scientists need to have in our minds when we trying to understand "Quantum Theory" and all those wonderful abstract ideas around "modern" or synchronous Science! World Science Festival: You are the Oasis in the Desert of this World! 💚Thank you All! 🌈

15:58-Don't we see a similar level of probability distribution across far distances in space and time at the macro level as well? Meaning, when we observe a star or galaxy here on Earth we are measuring it, so it's in a relatively fixed position. But if we were to travel to it's location to directly interact with it, would it not wildly fluctuate in speed and position on our way there? Mirroring the same pattern of behavior we see at the atomic scale?

Elise Crull and Brian Greene try so hard to communicate theories that reveal the uncertainty of how the universe works. I don't understand them but I get a sense of how connected and complex the universe is.

Just listen Brian, don't read the comments, unbelievable how much can i relax with this show.... Thanks for my mom that she beat me to learn English.

Brian: "You mentioned Quantum Mechanics, but I'm afraid to ask." 🤣🤣

This one will be fun cannot wait to watch it tonight :) In the Ender's Game books they used a device called the Ansible that could communicate across many light years. The term was first used in a novel by Ursula K. Le Guin in 1966 and some other authors also borrowed the term. In Enders Game this is how it worked (From wikipedia) It involved a fictional subatomic particle, the philote. The two quarks inside a pi meson can be separated by an arbitrary distance, while remaining connected by "philotic rays".This concept is similar to quantum teleportation due to entanglement; however, in reality, quark confinement prevents quarks from being separated by any observable distance.

The idea discussed is the only thing that makes me consider ghosts being a scientific plausibility. Cool to see this question get covered!

'The Ship of Theseus' come to mind when thinking about these sorts of things. As well, the idea of the "spime" of every Human life (look it up if you don't know, it's pretty cool). Hard to define oneself as a singular entity when we're always sloughing away particles, eating biomatter and shitting it out, regrowing hair and tissues, et cetera... All things are in a constant state of metamorphosis: select which state you wish to observe

Brian Greene explains complex concepts in simple terms with a clear and likable voice!!

Never having taken a science class, self taught, such as it is, one mystery, amongst many, that I will take to the grave with me, is why so many Physicist purported to have knowledge of QM , just seem to not understand the “Black Body Radiation Problem”, and what exactly Planck proposed as a solution. For instance, one, of many, Planck never believed or proposed that light consistent of particles and in fact later found such an idea nonsensical. An amazing distortion of the history of physics, by both Brian and Elise. Einstein gets full credit.

This idea that particle 1 and particle 4 are entangled through time, is thin at best. As all of the opposite qualities of 1 are alive in 2, and you use 2 to flip the spin of 3, which is entangled with 4. There is no spooky action backward through time. You measure the spin of 1. That value doesn't change when you measure 4. It's no surprise they agree because you made that happen normally through time.

Thank you. Very intelligent woman :) I have been getting stomped on for ages for even remotely suggesting that space-time may have some form of fundamental agency. When we change our context/perspective and allow the agency of space and time to have effect on on the material universe many of the unanswerable questions appear to fall into place. > I accept that it is difficult for humans to think or conceptualize complex ideas in 4D. It takes training to separate the classical human thinking out of the paradigm and it is not easy. The most difficult part is holding a thought containing an infinite number of event horizons in that 4D abstraction, but simplifying that abstraction down to a single and then just a small number of those event horizons makes it possible. Explaining to another person via a 2D or 3D realm is extremely difficult if not near impossible as the 4D context is immediately lost thus destroying the understanding that we are attempting to relate. > 2 good staring points are the spherical time histograms showing 3D space as flat spherical shells or layers of moments of the 3D in time. There are many hidden points of singularities as well as event horizons that are not immediately obvious. The other being that of the past and future light cones representations which also contain a large number (if not infinite) of intersecting singularities and event horizons. The 4 most notable being the event horizons at the side of the cones, the infinitely small intersect of the light cones past and forward event horizons at an infinitely small point in the "Now" present. and the depiction of the 2D plane that slices the "Now" moment at that intersect. That depiction of the "Now" plane in time is the event horizon where the quantum world is unfolding from moment to moment. There are an infinite number of event horizons (light cones) intersection at an infinitely small point across that 2D event plane. . So, we are at the question of what is connecting the intersect of ALL of those infinitely small points (light cone intersects) across that plane, that moment in time, that event horizon? We know if 2 or more of those intersecting points touch we have a classical interaction between particles in space at that event horizon in time, but what is the connection "across" that time plane for all entangled particles for that moment in time? The particle has no awareness of another particle outside of its infinitely small event horizon in that now moment. > I find myself separating that plane into a static moment of time (event horizon), and when that plane is progressing the concepts of relativity such as gravity and mass emerge and are knowable in the past light cone (in the wake of and trailing the event horizon of the time line).

I just realized near the end with the wooden rubiks cube, that even if entangled particles are separated in 3 or 4 dimensions, they could still be next to each other in the 5th or 6th dimensions...

Fascinating

@ 18:48 Brian says "all of those interaction (petting the cat, etc.) affect the quantum description of the cat, and… those interactions suppress the very parts of the quantum probability that are at odds with our experience, which is why our experience is as it is …" All that this statement is saying, which should not be too difficult to accept as reasonable, is that the function of the "conscious" human participant in these "interactions" is, first to 'map' them with his body's intelligent 'on-board, sensory-environment mapping computer' (or "conscious brain"), and then to use that map (and likewise previously derived/constructed related maps) to direct his body's subsequent momentum routing decisions (actions), thereby affecting the probability (by increasing some and reducing others) of the specific sequence of quantum 'detection' events which (in toto) constitute those 'self-perceived behavioral (inter-)actions', and thus of the set of 'quantum particle location- manifestations' that (in toto) comprise the structure of that perception. This boils down to recognition that the human observer's "sensory [self and his actions]-awareness waveform" is this otherwise purely random quantum probability wave universe engaged in its own "intelligent" (and hopefully soon to be "more intelligent") self-design and self-construction / configuration. I propose that the _structure_ of "the material universe" that we find ourselves participants in is comprised of the 'self-relative motion' (a.k.a. "acceleration") of an otherwise structureless 'Scale-Uniform' superfluid Medium (SUM) -- Einstein's "spacetime", the 'stuff' whose otherwise featureless flow appears to "curve" with proximity to a gravitating particulate mass. The overall geometric "structure" of this otherwise structureless fluid's "pure" self-relative motion is that of a "particulate" horn toroidal fluid vortex (a.k.a. a "black hole"), which -- apparently, by some means and mechanism [intimately related to and/or involving "the speed of light"], can 'self-fractalize', and/or generate the "appearance" of doing so. So, welcome to 'The Graviton', and let's recognize our [hopefully soon to be] intelligently self-aware human societal network (HSN) as a higher order extension and expression of the 'distributed network of "momentum" (or self-relative SUM-flow) re-routing particulate I/O devices' that "It" has apparently "selected" (or de facto "settled upon" if you prefer) as the foundational architecture (and operating principle) of its "self-organizing" mechanism.

During measurement what kind of interaction happens? Is it from the wavelength of the light? Is the measurement changes the energy of the object? Is scale of measurement matters? What would happen if we measure the object from small perspective?

Elise is a very good science communicator.

I so wanted a video on this ❤️

Amazing stuff

very insightful

If everything is quantum waves in Einstein's time-space understanding the quantum entanglement of particles is closer to the advancement of overall physics. May the pioneers keep pushing forward. I especially like the equal and opposite spin after the measurement. I am exploring spin propulsion

Your own chart indicates that particle 1, existed in T3, and therefore was able to convey or transfer information to particle 2, in T3 which in turn conveyed to particle 3 and thus to particle 4. There was no disconnection.

The answer to the question posed @16:00 is NOT solely quantum mechanical. It lies within the combination of Quantum Mechanics, Newtonian Mechanics and Special Relativity. Aka Quantum Field Theory. This combined understanding of reality reveals our universe is a block-timed reality fundamentally emerging from fields of energy that span all of space and all of time.

As always, most stimulating! Quick questions: since entanglement is so ubiquitous, can I create entanglement in a kitchen counter experiment? If I have a liter of water at room temperature on the kitchen counter, what percentage of the water molecules should I expect to be entangled at any given time?

I like the dart board bit. If the board were swinging on it's nail and the dart were moving in a straight line; it's eventual position on the board would be a probability, like a wave function. But if the frequency of the board and speed of the dart were at the speed of light then they would inevitably meet. There would be a simultaneity.

32:40 On spontaneous Lorentz transformations: the asymmetry of time actually implies the accumulation of time, more precisely, history, variety, aging. Instead of the Copenhagen and/or multi-world interpretations of quantum mechanics, the presence of spontaneous Lorentz transformations seems to be more physical. Thus, the world itself already has many-sided (~ "multi-world") and improvisational (~"probabilistic") properties. P.S. 0. "Indeed, it is clear that we cannot report the translational motion of the entire universe and check whether this motion affects the course of any processes. The principle of relativity therefore has heuristic and physical meanings only if it is valid for any closed system. However, the question arises, when can a system be considered closed? Is the remoteness of all the masses outside the considered system sufficient for this? The answer, according to experience, says that in the case of uniform and rectilinear motion, this is enough, but for other movements it is not enough. Summarizing, we can say that the postulate of relativity includes the statement that the uniform and rectilinear motion of the "center of gravity" of the Universe relative to some closed system does not affect the processes in this system." (Pauli, RT). 1. Obviously, the opposite is true for an expanding universe. Apparently, the researcher can detect and measure the effect of the aging process in his own frame of reference caused by the phenomenon of global time t(universe)=1/H: ds^ 2=c^2dт^2=g(00)c^ 2dt^2=(1-Ht*)c^2dt^2, where the parameter Ht* it shows how much of the global time has "passed" in its own frame of reference, t* is the measurement time according to the clock of the resting observer, t is the duration of any physical process in its own frame of reference relative to the clock. 2.The observer can measure the increase in the duration of the processes in the laboratory frame of reference: dт=[√ g(00)]dt=[√(1-Ht*)]dt~(1-Ht*)dt

Thanks for the nice video. But, I would not call that experiment as being entanglement in time. Entanglement involves a superposition of states that cannot be factorized and I do not see what states are entangled at different times in that experiment due to the measurements. The best example of entanglement in time is the Franson interferometer. One has two photons created at the same time by down conversion and sent each along a path to the left and to the right that each go through a 50-50 beam splitter that delays the photon or lets it go straight through. Then you detect each photon and see did the left come before the right, the right before the left, or both at the same time. For the ones not at the same time, there is only one way they occur, so the probability is a constant. But for the ones that go on the long long or short short options, they form a superposition and interfere. By changing the phase of one of the photons, on either path, you can get the coincidence to go from 0 to a maximal value. This is true entanglement in time, as we have a superposition of two pulses at physically different times, but they interfere simply because we do not know when they were created. Truly mind bowing in my view. And of course the big question is what happens to probability conservation if the coincidences can have varying probability. Think carefully and you can sort that out as well.

If we ever did find a way to communicate using the underlying mechanism of entanglement (instantaneous communication between entangled particles) that would also allow us to communicate through time. If you took one end of the communicator (e.g. a group of entangled particles in one location) and accelerated it enough for it to experience noticeable time dilation relative to the other end of entangled particles (the other end of the communicator) then you would be able to communicate through time. Probably another reason why its likely impossible to ever communicate using entanglement.

Since many years i had no problem with considering particles as waves and going along with the distribution pattern. The one thing i struggled with was to sort of accept the notion that these probabilistic waves ( are they physical? ) interacted with each other. If this sort of interaction was hard to imagine even in space like when you use multiple particles but it was even more difficult with the one particle where this interaction would have had to happened across time and the only idea that can come close to explaining that was entanglement across time. So it was more of a necessity 😂

Could it be that what we perceive as probabilistic properties of the quantum world be in reality the result of complex relations or entanglement with other particles ? In that senses if we could know of all the past or distant network of entanglement with other particles we could deduct the next position of an electron or whatever properties we identfy now as probabilistic ?

That´s a very good question.

Note that in a double slit experiment individual electron do form 1 dot on the screen. It is that only when many many many electrons go thru the slits, potentially with a gap of even a day between each electron passage, that collection of dots forms a banded pattern which scientists calls interference pattern. However, in a classical, water wave the interference pattern forms at the same instant in time. But like I described above the banded pattern can form over 10 thousand days formed from the dots of 10 thousand electrons passing one electron per day for 10 thousand days. So why should we think that the electron interfered with itself. It did not. So I do not think the language describing the DSE is formulated correctly.

RE entanglement, what if you applied conformal mapping to the spatial framework of the particles? Then in some transformed geometric sense you could end up with particles that are closer together or overlapping and would no longer have nonlocality from a non-Euclidean perspective. I mean I'm not a mathematican, but seems plausible?

Non-locality is like a mirror: The electron, when recorded, is simply expressing parity.

One thing I saw as missing is discussion of the axis about which spin is measured. I think, or my understanding is, that such spin is inherently aligned (up or down) with an axis of random choice. As such, it seems that spin is occurring about any and all axes simultaneously until measured. To me, that's not trivial. Doesn't this arise from the Stern-Gerlach experiment? How wrong am I?

Great discussion, and well moderated (as usual).

Although entangle particles are non-local in 3 dimensional space, they are indeed local in 4d spacetime (i.e. they are touching). So we shouldn't be surprised that entangled particles can behave this way.

Bro just dropped the hardest physics intro edit at the beginning.

A thought experiment I posed in Sabine Hossenfelder's comment section (which was mysteriously deleted for whatever the reason?) Here's my thought experiment: (non-existent technology is proposed for explanation purposes only) A one light second circumference race track is constructed (186,272 circular miles). An observation tower sits stationary at the center of the track. A light speed race car and driver set out and approach 99.9999% light speed. The driver then turns on his 1 second flashing strobe light with a 10 millisecond 'on' duration. Q: Will the driver experience time dilation? Q: What will the tower observer see? (Remember, there is no distance change between observer and driver) Qualify your answer in plain language. Assume the tower observer has a super telescope mounted on a rotating swivel where he is able to see the driver and his strobe light as they circle around the tower observers position. There is a part 2 to this T.E...

So, if the universe is spooky and weird at Planck length, does it become weirder/spookier, or more ordered at incomprehensibly large scales?

Maybe our concept of spacetime is still Newtonian after all these years? Seems to me there are 2 choices: 1) instaneous wave function collapse across spacetime is a "thing", or 2) Sean's Manyworlds is a "thing"

Just curious, isn't entanglement proof of higher dimension? I postulate that the information is actually travelling on or is connected via a different plane or higher dimension beyond our accessible 3-dimensional space, perhaps the higher dimensions begin to manifest at smaller and smaller scales of our 3D universe. I'd be keen to hear a string theorist opinion on this. Thanks for the informative clips.

are the particles in the double slit hitting the sides of the slit's and altering their path's and how would you know they are not

Hence the concept that reality is a perceptual event, thus giving individuals the ability of choosing their reality {within the parameters of their endocrinal responses) all of which is very spooky.

Nice😊😊. I hope to attend WSF when my degree ends.

I like that Elise Crull PhD. is aware that mathematics is a mapping of the data from the observations by the researchers which is dependent what precisely is the "area" of the research. Even precisely knowing the area, many branches from the observations may develop leading to other avenues of research on the same or even a newer project. Quantum statistics has to be used. It is not the phenomena! Just like a roadmap, is not the actual road you are traveling. Maps never really paint the whole picture, they point in a direction, and through ongoing, observed research we make better maps.

It's chaos, literally. I have written on this. The fractal does it all, and cosmology. I wrote to John Clauser today with my papers.

I alwayas had the title's question 🤔🤔

Brava👏🏼👏🏼 what a woman.. Brian Greene being a boss as always

I always get into thinking - (when the two slit experiment is done) there is information send yes/no if observing or detecting is done or not done. Information is a part of phenomen and stays in sistim. Or it leaves the systim when it is observed. So there must be difference. I'm not that super≈savvy in this kind of concepts. But does anyone know what i try explain? ( or mis‐understand ) And i always liked to believe that time is fuzzy at the smallest interval or scale. So that point between future +history is not infinite small .

Here is a thought: Could it be that the totality of our "illusion of Certainty" is the Quantum Uncertainty Realm of a Higher levels of existence and then would not our mathematical certainties be the "fog" of Possibilities that would be available to be measured from the point of view of entities existing at those upper levels?

I'd like to see what happens to the frequency of a photon that goes through the double slit experiment in time but must pass through the gas cloud that slows light down on one of the times the photon is fired at the director. Also what would happen if the detector was wired to the placement of an object

At 26:43 for any of you younggins out there who do the PlayStation thing. During the PlayStation 2's lifetime they the company were playing around with this idea. Not sure if they're still using the spooky theory but in PlayStation 2 console it made some of the games I feel way better. While watching this I wonder if anyone's correlated information perhaps new eyes type of thing. Be well everyone, never stop being the chaos engines you are.

Love scientists speaking about the limitations.

It is mindboggling to wonder what compels so many very well educated and very intelligent people to so seriously discuss matters regarding the beginning and end of the entire universe and all the matter in it, which bear absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the only entity in the entire known uiverse that delivers and sustains 100% of all life in it, THE PLANTS, without the air and food from which none of them would survive even for a single second. And talking about a TOE without any relevance to plants is planning a wedding without the bride.

Thank you Elise.

26:18 The "they are not talking to each other" is as much a philosophical stance because it allows you to say that there is no communication. But I am not so sure. Instead of "talking" to each other we reduce it to a "corroboration" - but we are just playing with words. What if, despite the fact that we don't want it to be, that information is being transmitted, then our view of time and space is far from complete and we still have not solved what "reality" really is, except it allows us to "be." Are we subservient to a system that we are yet to figure out. Is space folded back on itself, is infinity only a concept inside the human mind and that distance is another illusion as to the question about space and time; how can space be defined as nothing and yet have a characteristic that can be curved in the presence of matter. How can nothing be curved at all? But if it can, then why can distance not also be manipulated when we are observing and measuring entangled particles?

She was passionate 👏✌️👍🏼

So if the universe is probabilistic then at the “beginning”, can we really speak of “initial conditions” since instead it must have been “all possibilities” what does that tell us about entropy at the Big Bang? Wouldn’t that qualify as maximum entropy?

It may be that multiple universes are not separated by some sort of multiple dimensional barrier, but by time. It could be there is a fundamental quantum unit of time. Something much, much smaller than a Planck unit of time. And when "looking" at these units we may find a gap in which there are no units at all. A period perhaps many units long. Then another unit of time, then another gap and so on. It may be that we only exist for one tick of that "clock" and then some other entire universe is impressed onto this same space, followed by another universe, and another, and so on. But it all happens so fast that it seems to all of those universes that time is continuous. This is similar to how multiprocessing works in computers. Or it could be that the units of time are longer than that but we and our universe are placed into suspension such that no time passes for our universe while in that state so we don't realize it is happening to us. Then, when it's our turn again everything just picks up from exactly where things left off. That way it doesn't matter how long we are "off-Line." No time passes for us while in this timeless limbo. Time simply doesn't exist there. We could be there a Planck unit of time or a billion years, there would be no difference.

What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibrations of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Brian and the team at WSF, I loved maths as a kid back in the eighties but my life took a different path, but thanks to these fantastic videos(love how seamlessly the videos are) I have a deep abiding fascination with cosmology and quantum field theory. So thank you Mr Brian Greene for being an awesome teacher and author. From a very wet Belfast,Ireland

To my less educated mind, it seems to me that if 2 things can be entangled over massive distance it suggests to me that space has to be illusory. And if space and time have such a close relationship that they are referred to as spacetime, then time must be illusory too. Emergent maybe. It is still going to be interesting to discover the rules relating to it's apparent existence though.

"And that's pretty cool!" Elise evokes a good Jodie Foster from Contact (1997).

Very cool experiment showing how particles can have an entangled property even though they never coexisted. Not entirely surprising, given that the Bell state correlations are independent of spatial and temporal separations of the measurement events. There is simply some conserved quantity between 1 and 2 that 2 shares with 3 and 3 shares with 4. Therefore, 1 and 4 share a conserved property. That's not really the mystery of entanglement per se. Let me show you that mystery and its solution per quantum information theory as given in "Einstein's Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit" (Oxford UP June 2024). Everything I'm going to say follows from mathematical and empirical facts, so it's `analytically true'. Whether or not you consider it explanatory is up to you, but it is an explanation of entanglement equal to that of length contraction in special relativity, which most physicists are satisfied with 🙂 The mystery of quantum entanglement arises because we are looking for a 'causal mechanism' behind its correlations, what Einstein called "constructive efforts." Einstein was faced with a very similar situation concerning constructive accounts of length contraction (and time dilation) to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment. Einstein wrote: "By and by I despaired of the possibility of discovering the true laws by means of constructive efforts based on known facts. The longer and the more despairingly I tried, the more I came to the conviction that only the discovery of a universal formal principle could lead us to assured results." That is, he gave up looking for causal mechanisms ("constructive efforts") that would shrink meter sticks and slow down clocks to fool everyone into measuring the same value for the speed of light c, regardless of their relative motions (an empirically discovered fact known as the light postulate). Instead, he said c is a constant of Nature per Maxwell's equations, so the relativity principle -- the laws of physics (including their constants of Nature) are the same in all inertial reference frames -- demands that everyone measure the same value for c, regardless of their relative motions. The Lorentz transformations of special relativity (SR) follow from the light postulate as justified by the relativity principle. As it turns out, the same opportunity for quantum mechanics (QM) has been provided by quantum information theorists. That is, they have reconstructed QM based on an empirically discovered fact called Information Invariance & Continuity that (in non-information-theoretic terms) means everyone measures the same value for Planck's constant h, regardless of their relative spatial orientations. How does that resolve the mystery of quantum entanglement? Suppose you send a vertical spin up electron to Stern-Gerlach (SG) magnets oriented at 60 deg relative to the vertical. Since spin is a form of angular momentum, classical mechanics says the angular momentum you should measure is (hbar/2)cos(60) = hbar/4 in that direction of SG spatial orientation. But, the SG measurement of electron spin constitutes a measurement of h, so everyone has to get the same +/- hbar/2 for a spin measurement in any SG spatial orientation, which means you can't get what you expect from common sense classical physics. Instead, QM says the measurement of a vertical spin up electron at 60 deg will produce +hbar/2 with a probability of 0.75 and it will produce -hbar/2 with a probability of 0.25, so the average is (hbar/2 + hbar/2 + hbar/2 - hbar/2)/4 = hbar/4. In other words, quantum mechanics says you get the common sense classical result on 'average only' because of the observer-independence of h. Now suppose Alice and Bob are measuring the spin singlet state (the two spins are anti-aligned when measured in the same direction, as shown in this video) and Alice obtains +hbar/2 vertically and Bob measures his particle at 120 deg relative to Alice. Obviously, if Bob had measured vertically he would have obtained -hbar/2, so at 120 deg Alice says he should get hbar/4 per our single particle example. But of course, Bob must measure the same value for h that Alice does, so he can't get the fractional value of h Alice says he should (otherwise, Alice would be in a preferred reference frame). Instead, his outcomes at 120 deg corresponding to Alice's +hbar/2 outcomes vertically average to hbar/4 just like the single particle case. And, of course, the data are symmetric so Bob can partition the results according to -*-his-*- +/- hbar/2 outcomes and show that Alice's results satisfy conservation of spin angular momentum on 'average only'. In the end, Alice partitions the data per her +/- hbar/2 outcomes and says Bob's results must be averaged to satisfy conservation of spin angular momentum while Bob's partition shows it's Alice's outcomes that must be averaged (Answering Mermin’s challenge with conservation per no preferred reference frame, Scientific Reports volume 10, Article number: 15771 (2020)). This should remind you immediately of an analogous situation in SR. There when Alice and Bob occupy different references frames via relative motion, they partition spacetime events per their own surfaces of simultaneity and show clearly that each other's meter sticks are short and their clocks run slow. In other words, the mystery of quantum entanglement resides in 'average-only' conservation that results from "no preferred reference frame" (NPRF) giving the observer-independence of h (NPRF + h). And, the mystery of length contraction resides in the relativity of simultaneity that results from "no preferred reference frame" giving the observer-independence of c (NPRF + c). Give up your constructive bias for QM just as is done for SR and physics makes perfect sense. But, the implications for your worldview are profound; you have to accept that physics is most fundamentally about constraints on the 4-dimensional (spatiotemporal) organization of worldtubes per NPRF + c interacting via the exchange of quanta per NPRF + h. So, precisely as can be inferred from this video, reality is not fundamentally about causal mechanisms.

Both Classical Physics and Quantum Mechanics specify how things are now. The Newtonian equations predict how they will be later on. The equations of QM specify the probability of how things will be later on. The logical explanation is that we have an uncertain future coming into existence with potential photon ∆E=hf energy, of what might happen, exchanging into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of electrons of what is actually happening. This forms an irreversible probabilistic process with an uncertain future coming into existence photon by photon with the absorption and emission of light waves.

Could it be that at that level subatomic particles are capable of illuminating linguistic prepositions that define their location in regards to a body?

I see a stunning consistency between non-locality with the Buddhist notion of dependent origination. But it would be a historic mistake if science ignored the parallel between Being Time (Uji) as proposed by Dogen Zenji, a 13th century Buddhist monk, and non-locality, especially time.

18:43 Isn't decoherence "shrouding/veiling" it, rather than "suppressing" it??

I love Brian Greene!

I would say yes because if a particle moves from one location to another it's time reference changes. This is proven with clocks.

Question: could the field itself be the intermediary between entangled particles, bypassing any FTL requirement?

Haven't watched yet, saw the title and mind went "is this what is meant by retro causality? lol I have no idea 😅

Dr Crull's magnificent hair is physics-defying!

Nice to see the shout out to Grete Hermann at 22:11

Possibilities are endless

In the double split experiment, it have quantum probability is it change when you change the way that each particular group A have it own physic properties like it magnitude and it direction in complex sin wave put it force on another each particular in group B with some different patterns direction on the surface particular group b in the very small amount of time like 1/trillion milliseconds emit particular in group b in some different patterns that go straight or diagonal through the split that make more than 2 line on other side of the split. In your experiment have you try change the properties of group A and B like the number of electron, proton, neutron, the force magnitude, direction, moving pattern of group A on group B make group B emit, will it make the change on number or the properties of lines like the height, width, the colors, the number of particular on each line that you get? Have you tried it?

When I think about densities and then I address the issue of time space itself I find it hard to believe that Time exists without the fact that vibrations FALLOW a path that time cant slow down or speed up the pathways itself is entangled with the reflection of the vibration that makes it continuously floating in the spacing process circles within circles of billions of trillions of particular vibrations Crystals record the tracks of time space itself vibrations are exactly what we are experiencing

we called it space-time for a reason , if particles are entangled in space , they're Also entangled in time time is the changing of space , or in short ... change

Looking for features in interactions from Mathamatcs to reality. As in screen one properties of same object reflect two different quality of choice mostly define by constant is indeed a matter of reference and or entanglement. IS ENTANGLEMENT WEIRD. Extended boundary by local variables by limits.

So does the bell experiment breaks causality?

How many times has that across time entanglement been replicated??

The answer is yes but something that you should be aware of, time is not linear, it only seems to so. 💥

If spacetime is connected, then, yes. Right? There is agreement particles are entangled between space, so you could extrapolate they are entangled between changes in time/distance.