DOCSLIB.ORG

Classical Geometric Resolution of the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen Paradox

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Classical Geometric Resolution of the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen Paradox Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 80, pp. 7051-7053, November 1983 Physics Classical geometric resolution of the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen paradox (quantum mechanics/nonseparability/gauge theory/fiber bundle) YUVAL NE'EMANt Tel Aviv University, Ranat Aviv, 69978, Israel; and Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540 Contributed by Yuval Ne'eman, July 7, 1983 ABSTRACT I show that, in the geometry of a fiber bundle EPR nonlocal action describing a gauge theory, curvature and parallel transport en- sure and impose nonseparability. The "Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen The typical EPR experiment deals with a composite state (AB paradox" is thus resolved "classically." I conjecture that the os- ...) at the origin 0 that then decomposes, the constituents A, tentatiously "implausible" features of the quantum treatment are B, etc., thus. going their separate ways. The composite state due to the fact that space-time separability, a basic assumption of carries a certain irreducible representation D()mp of the group single-particle nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, does not fit the G, appearing in the Clebsch-Gordan decomposition of the bundle geometry of the complete physics. product DA X DB X ... Fiber bundle geometry reproduces. nonlocal quantum effects DA®DB *- = E Dn)mp. [1] semiclassically n A measurement of the observable go, a quantum number of Those features of quantum mechanics that appear to disagree G or of its generator algebra g (for a Lie group) performed on with a classically conditioned physical intuition are of two types: the constituent A constrains through Eq. 1 the values of the features relating to the act of measurement (collapse of the state- same quantum number at B, C, etc. vector) and nonlocal features. The latter include the Aharonov- A simple example of an EPR situation is provided by fIb de- -Bohm (1) effect; monopoles both of the Dirac type (2) in elec- cay (20). The two y rays should have their spin polarizations tromagnetism and of the 't Hooft-Polyakov type (3) in Yang- adding up to zero (and to negative total intrinsic parity) when Mills (YM) theories (4, 5); other YM structures such as instan- observed, whatever the AB distance. For example, once the tons (6, 7), merons, and such; and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (8) helicity of A is measured and found to be + 1, a measurement (EPR) simulated action at a distance. In recent years, the Ahar- of B will have to yield -1 with certainty. In the contending onov-Bohm (1) effect [first tested experimentally by Chambers realism view, this would be understood classically as indicating (9)] was given a semi-classical geometric realization, as a to- that the physical allocation of helicities had actually preceded pological global effect (10). Electromagnetic gauge invariance both measurements and is part of the underlying reality searched is realized geometrically on a fiber bundle (11, 12). Such a man- for by Einstein and his collaborators. The probabilistic answer ifold given by quantum mechanics is then supposed to represent an (13-15) corresponds to a nontrivial juxtaposition of a (ver- epistemological uncertainty (i.e., lack of knowledge), rather than tical) group space (or group representation space), the fiber at an intrinsic indeterminacy. However, experimental verification each point of the (horizontal) base space (generally space-time). of the existence of a fundamental indeterminacy has been pro- The relevant group constituting the fiber is in this case the phase- vided, e.g., through the falsification of Bell's inequalities (21- invariance group. (This is in fact the only data with a quantum 24), which had indeed assumed the existence of such an un- origin, the rest of the description being entirely classical.) The derlying reality. We are thus forced to accept nonseparability fiber bundle is a locally trivial juxtaposition, yet allowing for a or apparent action at a distance. When one usually adds here nonsimply connected geometry to arise globally as in the case the postulate of special relativity (a somewhat inconsistent pro- of a Mobius strip, where a twist is introduced globally only. In cedure in treating nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, to say Yang's treatment of the Dirac monopole (16), the global effect the least), nonseparability appears to imply in addition acausal is achieved by the removal of a point at the origin of the R3 base behavior, because there is no way for the results of a mea- space. It is this nontrivial structure that creates nonshrinkable surement in A to propagate fast enough so as to affect a (lab- loops or n-spheres and results in discrete topological effects oratory frame) simultaneous helicity measurement in B. (winding numbers) reproducing both the Aharonov-Bohm ef- A point that does not appear to have been generally dis- fect itself (12) and monopoles (16), instantons, merons, and such. cussed in the study of the paradox relates to the local definition In recent years, several papers have reported this geometric of the angular momentum generators themselves (in nonrela- realization of YM gauges (4, 5). tivistic quantum mechanics, this is of course, axiomatic) or of In the present note, I point out that the geometry of fiber the momenta in the original EPR gedanken experiment. How bundles (13-15, 17-19) provides in addition a classical geo- can these algebraic generators be defined in two different places metric realization of EPR nonlocal action or nonseparability of and still be assumed to represent the same entity? How do we the composite wave function. know that the two helicities can still be added to zero? Could The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge Abbreviations: EPR, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen; YM, Yang-Mills. payment. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertise- t Also Ministry of Science and Development, Jerusalem, Israel; and on ment" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact. leave from the University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712. 7051 Downloaded by guest on September 27, 2021 7052 Physics: Ne'eman Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 80 (1983) not some difference in normalization, for instance, have crept picture-quantum mechanics as implying that "God plays dice"- in along the trajectories of the y quanta, so that +1 at A would or better, roulette. Should we then visualize the state vector |A) not cancel -1 at B? Are we certain that the z direction at A is flipping randomly between the states of DA, the parallelism indeed parallel to the z at B? Is a spin-scalar at the origin still provided by the connection constrains the states JB), C), etc., a scalar at A or B? It is surprising that, with so much attention and forces them to flip in unison with IA). In other words, the given to the nonlocal effects, considerations of that type were gauge field e, and its curvature or field strength f,, ensure generally not envisaged. Yet it is precisely to answer these that our quantum number go is the same everywhere and that queries-posed in a different context-that YM gauges were all fibers flip together in the quantum roulette. This is non- invented (4, 5), following Weyl (25). It is thus not surprising separability, ensured by gauge invariance. (iii) A measurement that we should now be able to claim that the geometry gen- of IA) is thus a measurement of the entire V. (iv) In a relativistic erated by such gauges (11, 12) does contain a topological mech- frame, relativistic quantum field theory being causal,.gauge in- anism realizing EPR nonseparability. Whereas the Aharonov- variance will again ensure nonseparability and this without vi- Bohm effect, monopoles, instantons, and such result from those olating causality. discrete nonsimply connected global situations, .EPR reflects parallel transport, another fundamental characteristic of fiber Comments bundles (13-15, 17-19). Paradoxes' appear when a description is-incomplete. The woman EPR is classically realized in a fiber bundle -in Houdini's trick- reappearing alive andwhole after being sawed in two--poses a paradox only as long as we are not informed Separability is a natural assumption in a picture in which space about that opening underneath her box that enables her to re- (or space-time) is uncorrelated with the relevant EPR observ- move herself from the action of the saw. Nonrelativistic single- able, as it is in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. However, particle quantum mechanics is an approximation; it is incom- in a fiber bundle geometry, the manifold is constrained so as plete both in being nonrelativistic and in separating out a single to preserve parallelism whatever the magnitude of the base-space particle. Einstein considered separability as a plausible ap- interval. Translation from the origin, where the composite state proximation of attenuation by distance. However, this can no carries the irreducible representation D(°)mp of G (in most ex- more be-taken at face.value when the true description of nature amples-the scalar representation) has to be generated by the involves manifolds such as fiber bundles, in which space-time covariant derivative^D,4 = a,. + w',AA. Here a, is the space (or is only the base-manifold. Various schools of thought exist with respect to the incom- space-time) a , w,, represents the horizontal components of pleteness of quantum mechanics. Some claim that what is miss- the.Lie.algebra valued connection c, and A represents a basis ing is a representation of the observer's mind processes; others .of g. We work-in the product basis of Eq. 1, so that DA can act require the adjunction of an infinite replication of alternate both on the composite state and on the constituents. worlds and such. What I suggest here is that-to the extent that c EPR is concerned-the paradox arises only because of the na- The manner in which the connection at any point p(x,y) ture of the single-particle approximation (separability), an ide- of a principal bundle P(M,G,ir,.) maps the tangent manifold P* alization that is contradicted by the geometric structure of the onto the abstract (or global) Lie algebra g of G has been pre- (gauge theory) complete physics.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Relational Quantum Mechanics
    Relational Quantum Mechanics Matteo Smerlak† September 17, 2006 †Ecole normale sup´erieure de Lyon, F-69364 Lyon, EU E-mail: [email protected] Abstract In this internship report, we present Carlo Rovelli’s relational interpretation of quantum mechanics, focusing on its historical and conceptual roots. A critical analysis of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument is then put forward, which suggests that the phenomenon of ‘quantum non-locality’ is an artifact of the orthodox interpretation, and not a physical effect. A speculative discussion of the potential import of the relational view for quantum-logic is finally proposed. Figure 0.1: Composition X, W. Kandinski (1939) 1 Acknowledgements Beyond its strictly scientific value, this Master 1 internship has been rich of encounters. Let me express hereupon my gratitude to the great people I have met. First, and foremost, I want to thank Carlo Rovelli1 for his warm welcome in Marseille, and for the unexpected trust he showed me during these six months. Thanks to his rare openness, I have had the opportunity to humbly but truly take part in active research and, what is more, to glimpse the vivid landscape of scientific creativity. One more thing: I have an immense respect for Carlo’s plainness, unaltered in spite of his renown achievements in physics. I am very grateful to Antony Valentini2, who invited me, together with Frank Hellmann, to the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, in Canada. We spent there an incredible week, meeting world-class physicists such as Lee Smolin, Jeffrey Bub or John Baez, and enthusiastic postdocs such as Etera Livine or Simone Speziale.
    [Show full text]
  • The E.P.R. Paradox George Levesque
    Undergraduate Review Volume 3 Article 20 2007 The E.P.R. Paradox George Levesque Follow this and additional works at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/undergrad_rev Part of the Quantum Physics Commons Recommended Citation Levesque, George (2007). The E.P.R. Paradox. Undergraduate Review, 3, 123-130. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/undergrad_rev/vol3/iss1/20 This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. Copyright © 2007 George Levesque The E.P.R. Paradox George Levesque George graduated from Bridgewater his paper intends to discuss the E.P.R. paradox and its implications State College with majors in Physics, for quantum mechanics. In order to do so, this paper will discuss the Mathematics, Criminal Justice, and features of intrinsic spin of a particle, the Stern-Gerlach experiment, Sociology. This piece is his Honors project the E.P.R. paradox itself and the views it portrays. In addition, we will for Electricity and Magnetism advised by consider where such a classical picture succeeds and, eventually, as we will see Dr. Edward Deveney. George ruminated Tin Bell’s inequality, fails in the strange world we live in – the world of quantum to help the reader formulate, and accept, mechanics. why quantum mechanics, though weird, is valid. Intrinsic Spin Intrinsic spin angular momentum is odd to describe by any normal terms. It is unlike, and often entirely unrelated to, the classical “orbital angular momentum.” But luckily we can describe the intrinsic spin by its relationship to the magnetic moment of the particle being considered.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Physics Group Decoherent Histories Approach: a Quantum Description of Closed Systems
    Theoretical Physics Group Department of Physics Decoherent Histories Approach: A Quantum Description of Closed Systems Author: Supervisor: Pak To Cheung Prof. Jonathan J. Halliwell CID: 01830314 A thesis submitted for the degree of MSc Quantum Fields and Fundamental Forces Contents 1 Introduction2 2 Mathematical Formalism9 2.1 General Idea...................................9 2.2 Operator Formulation............................. 10 2.3 Path Integral Formulation........................... 18 3 Interpretation 20 3.1 Decoherent Family............................... 20 3.1a. Logical Conclusions........................... 20 3.1b. Probabilities of Histories........................ 21 3.1c. Causality Paradox........................... 22 3.1d. Approximate Decoherence....................... 24 3.2 Incompatible Sets................................ 25 3.2a. Contradictory Conclusions....................... 25 3.2b. Logic................................... 28 3.2c. Single-Family Rule........................... 30 3.3 Quasiclassical Domains............................. 32 3.4 Many History Interpretation.......................... 34 3.5 Unknown Set Interpretation.......................... 36 4 Applications 36 4.1 EPR Paradox.................................. 36 4.2 Hydrodynamic Variables............................ 41 4.3 Arrival Time Problem............................. 43 4.4 Quantum Fields and Quantum Cosmology.................. 45 5 Summary 48 6 References 51 Appendices 56 A Boolean Algebra 56 B Derivation of Path Integral Method From Operator
    [Show full text]
  • On Relational Quantum Mechanics Oscar Acosta University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected]
    University of Texas at El Paso DigitalCommons@UTEP Open Access Theses & Dissertations 2010-01-01 On Relational Quantum Mechanics Oscar Acosta University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd Part of the Philosophy of Science Commons, and the Quantum Physics Commons Recommended Citation Acosta, Oscar, "On Relational Quantum Mechanics" (2010). Open Access Theses & Dissertations. 2621. https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd/2621 This is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ON RELATIONAL QUANTUM MECHANICS OSCAR ACOSTA Department of Philosophy Approved: ____________________ Juan Ferret, Ph.D., Chair ____________________ Vladik Kreinovich, Ph.D. ___________________ John McClure, Ph.D. _________________________ Patricia D. Witherspoon Ph. D Dean of the Graduate School Copyright © by Oscar Acosta 2010 ON RELATIONAL QUANTUM MECHANICS by Oscar Acosta THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at El Paso in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Philosophy THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO MAY 2010 Acknowledgments I would like to express my deep felt gratitude to my advisor and mentor Dr. Ferret for his never-ending patience, his constant motivation and for not giving up on me. I would also like to thank him for introducing me to the subject of philosophy of science and hiring me as his teaching assistant.
    [Show full text]
  • Path Integral Implementation of Relational Quantum Mechanics
    Path Integral Implementation of Relational Quantum Mechanics Jianhao M. Yang ( [email protected] ) Qualcomm (United States) Research Article Keywords: Relational Quantum mechanics, Path Integral, Entropy, Inuence Functional Posted Date: February 18th, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-206217/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Version of Record: A version of this preprint was published at Scientic Reports on April 21st, 2021. See the published version at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88045-6. Path Integral Implementation of Relational Quantum Mechanics Jianhao M. Yang∗ Qualcomm, San Diego, CA 92121, USA (Dated: February 4, 2021) Relational formulation of quantum mechanics is based on the idea that relational properties among quantum systems, instead of the independent properties of a quantum system, are the most fundamental elements to construct quantum mechanics. In the recent works (J. M. Yang, Sci. Rep. 8:13305, 2018), basic relational quantum mechanics framework is formulated to derive quantum probability, Born’s Rule, Schr¨odinger Equations, and measurement theory. This paper gives a concrete implementation of the relational probability amplitude by extending the path integral formulation. The implementation not only clarifies the physical meaning of the relational probability amplitude, but also gives several important applications. For instance, the double slit experiment can be elegantly explained. A path integral representation of the reduced density matrix of the observed system can be derived. Such representation is shown valuable to describe the interaction history of the measured system and a series of measuring systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Bachelorarbeit
    Bachelorarbeit The EPR-Paradox, Nonlocality and the Question of Causality Ilvy Schultschik angestrebter akademischer Grad Bachelor of Science (BSc) Wien, 2014 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: 033 676 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Physik Betreuer: Univ. Prof. Dr. Reinhold A. Bertlmann Contents 1 Motivation and Mathematical framework 2 1.1 Entanglement - Separability . .2 1.2 Schmidt Decomposition . .3 2 The EPR-paradox 5 2.1 Introduction . .5 2.2 Preface . .5 2.3 EPR reasoning . .8 2.4 Bohr's reply . 11 3 Hidden Variables and no-go theorems 12 4 Nonlocality 14 4.1 Nonlocality and Quantum non-separability . 15 4.2 Teleportation . 17 5 The Bell theorem 19 5.1 Bell's Inequality . 19 5.2 Derivation . 19 5.3 Violation by quantum mechanics . 21 5.4 CHSH inequality . 22 5.5 Bell's theorem and further discussion . 24 5.6 Different assumptions . 26 6 Experimental realizations and loopholes 26 7 Causality 29 7.1 Causality in Special Relativity . 30 7.2 Causality and Quantum Mechanics . 33 7.3 Remarks and prospects . 34 8 Acknowledgment 35 1 1 Motivation and Mathematical framework In recent years, many physicists have taken the incompatibility between cer- tain notions of causality, reality, locality and the empirical data less and less as a philosophical discussion about interpretational ambiguities. Instead sci- entists started to regard this tension as a productive resource for new ideas about quantum entanglement, quantum computation, quantum cryptogra- phy and quantum information. This becomes especially apparent looking at the number of citations of the original EPR paper, which has risen enormously over recent years, and be- coming the starting point for many groundbreaking ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Many Worlds Model Resolving the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox Via a Direct Realism to Modal Realism Transition That Preserves Einstein Locality
    Many Worlds Model resolving the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox via a Direct Realism to Modal Realism Transition that preserves Einstein Locality Sascha Vongehr †,†† †Department of Philosophy, Nanjing University †† National Laboratory of Solid-State Microstructures, Thin-film and Nano-metals Laboratory, Nanjing University Hankou Lu 22, Nanjing 210093, P. R. China The violation of Bell inequalities by quantum physical experiments disproves all relativistic micro causal, classically real models, short Local Realistic Models (LRM). Non-locality, the infamous “spooky interaction at a distance” (A. Einstein), is already sufficiently ‘unreal’ to motivate modifying the “realistic” in “local realistic”. This has led to many worlds and finally many minds interpretations. We introduce a simple many world model that resolves the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. The model starts out as a classical LRM, thus clarifying that the many worlds concept alone does not imply quantum physics. Some of the desired ‘non-locality’, e.g. anti-correlation at equal measurement angles, is already present, but Bell’s inequality can of course not be violated. A single and natural step turns this LRM into a quantum model predicting the correct probabilities. Intriguingly, the crucial step does obviously not modify locality but instead reality: What before could have still been a direct realism turns into modal realism. This supports the trend away from the focus on non-locality in quantum mechanics towards a mature structural realism that preserves micro causality. Keywords: Many Worlds Interpretation; Many Minds Interpretation; Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox; Everett Relativity; Modal Realism; Non-Locality PACS: 03.65. Ud 1 1 Introduction: Quantum Physics and Different Realisms ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • John Von Neumann's “Impossibility Proof” in a Historical Perspective’, Physis 32 (1995), Pp
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by SAS-SPACE Published: Louis Caruana, ‘John von Neumann's “Impossibility Proof” in a Historical Perspective’, Physis 32 (1995), pp. 109-124. JOHN VON NEUMANN'S ‘IMPOSSIBILITY PROOF’ IN A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ABSTRACT John von Neumann's proof that quantum mechanics is logically incompatible with hidden varibales has been the object of extensive study both by physicists and by historians. The latter have concentrated mainly on the way the proof was interpreted, accepted and rejected between 1932, when it was published, and 1966, when J.S. Bell published the first explicit identification of the mistake it involved. What is proposed in this paper is an investigation into the origins of the proof rather than the aftermath. In the first section, a brief overview of the his personal life and his proof is given to set the scene. There follows a discussion on the merits of using here the historical method employed elsewhere by Andrew Warwick. It will be argued that a study of the origins of von Neumann's proof shows how there is an interaction between the following factors: the broad issues within a specific culture, the learning process of the theoretical physicist concerned, and the conceptual techniques available. In our case, the ‘conceptual technology’ employed by von Neumann is identified as the method of axiomatisation. 1. INTRODUCTION A full biography of John von Neumann is not yet available. Moreover, it seems that there is a lack of extended historical work on the origin of his contributions to quantum mechanics.
    [Show full text]
  • EPR Paradox Solved by Special Theory of Relativity J
    Vol. 125 (2014) ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA A No. 5 EPR Paradox Solved by Special Theory of Relativity J. Lee 17161 Alva Rd. #1123, San Diego, CA 92127, U.S.A. (Received November 7, 2013) This paper uses the special theory of relativity to introduce a novel solution to EinsteinPodolskyRosen paradox. More specically, the faster-than-light communication is described to explain two types of EPR paradox experiments: photon polarization and electronpositron pair spins. Most importantly, this paper explains why this faster-than-light communication does not violate the special theory of relativity. DOI: 10.12693/APhysPolA.125.1107 PACS: 03.65.Ud 1. Introduction At this point, it is very important to note that both EPR paradox and Bell's inequality theorem assume that EPR paradox refers to the thought experiment de- faster-than-light (FTL) communication between the two signed by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) to show entangled systems is theoretically impossible [1, 3]. It is the incompleteness of wave function in quantum mechan- the intent of this paper to show how the FTL commu- ics (QM) [1]. In QM, the Heisenberg uncertainty princi- nication could be possible without violating the special ple places a limitation on how precisely two complemen- theory of relativity (SR). In short, it is the innite time tary physical properties of a system can be measured si- dilation that would be responsible for the instant FTL multaneously [2]. EPR came up with the following para- communication. doxical scenario where the two properties, i.e. momen- 2. Methods tum and position, could be measured precisely, and thus The two common types of Bell's inequality experiments would contradict the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
    [Show full text]
  • SENTENARYO NG TEORYANG GENERAL RELATIVITY March 14, 2016 (1 - 3 Pm), NIP Auditorium, up Diliman Program Emcees: Ms
    SENTENARYO NG TEORYANG GENERAL RELATIVITY March 14, 2016 (1 - 3 pm), NIP Auditorium, UP Diliman Program Emcees: Ms. Cherrie Olaya and Mr. Nestor Bareza National Anthem Welcome Remarks Academician William G. Padolina (NAST) Presentation 1 Einstein: Science, Image, and Impact (Dr. Perry Esguerra) Presentation 2 Einstein and the Music of the Spheres (Dr. Ian Vega) Intermission NIP Resonance Choir Presentation 3 From Einstein’s Universe to the Multiverse (Dr. Reina Reyes) Open Forum* *Moderators: Dr. May Lim and Dr. Nathaniel Hermosa II Closing Remarks Dr. Jose Maria P. Balmaceda (UP College of Science) (Refreshments will be served at the NIP Veranda) What’s Inside? Organizing Committee Messages p.1 Extended Abstracts 8 Dr. Percival Almoro (Chair) Einstein chronology 18 Dr. Perry Esguerra Einstein quotations 19 Dr. Ian Vega Dr. Caesar Saloma (Convenor) Outside Front Cover Outside Back Cover Inside Back Cover Einstein in Vienna, 1921 Depiction of gravitational waves Galaxies By: F. Schmutzer generated by binary neutron stars. By: Hubble Ultra Deep Field (Wikimedia Commons) By: R. Hurt/Caltech-JPL (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu. (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/im- edu/hbase/astro/deepfield.html) ages/universe/20131106/pul- sar20131106-full.jpg) Acknowledgements Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) 1 2 Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) 3 4 Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/11/466286219/in-milestone- scientists-detect-waves-in-space-time-as-black-holes-collide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4XzLDM3Py8 https://soundcloud.com/emily-lakdawalla Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) 5 6 Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) Sentenaryo ng Teoryang General Relativity (March 14, 2016, UP-NIP) 7 Einstein: Science, Image, and Impact By Perry Esguerra ‘WHY is it that nobodY for photoluminescence, the ory of relativity.
    [Show full text]
  • Albert Einstein - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 27
    Albert Einstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 27 Albert Einstein From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Albert Einstein ( /ælbərt a nsta n/; Albert Einstein German: [albt a nʃta n] ( listen); 14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) was a German-born theoretical physicist who developed the theory of general relativity, effecting a revolution in physics. For this achievement, Einstein is often regarded as the father of modern physics.[2] He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics "for his services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect". [3] The latter was pivotal in establishing quantum theory within physics. Near the beginning of his career, Einstein thought that Newtonian mechanics was no longer enough to reconcile the laws of classical mechanics with the laws of the electromagnetic field. This led to the development of his special theory of relativity. He Albert Einstein in 1921 realized, however, that the principle of relativity could also be extended to gravitational fields, and with his Born 14 March 1879 subsequent theory of gravitation in 1916, he published Ulm, Kingdom of Württemberg, a paper on the general theory of relativity. He German Empire continued to deal with problems of statistical Died mechanics and quantum theory, which led to his 18 April 1955 (aged 76) explanations of particle theory and the motion of Princeton, New Jersey, United States molecules. He also investigated the thermal properties Residence Germany, Italy, Switzerland, United of light which laid the foundation of the photon theory States of light. In 1917, Einstein applied the general theory of relativity to model the structure of the universe as a Ethnicity Jewish [4] whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Bell's Theorem...What?!
    Bell’s Theorem...What?! Entanglement and Other Puzzles Kyle Knoepfel 27 February 2008 University of Notre Dame Bell’s Theorem – p.1/49 Some Quotes about Quantum Mechanics Erwin Schrödinger: “I do not like it, and I am sorry I ever had anything to do with it.” Max von Laue (regarding de Broglie’s theory of electrons having wave properties): “If that turns out to be true, I’ll quit physics.” Niels Bohr: “Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood a single word...” Richard Feynman: “I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics.” Carlo Rubbia (when asked why quarks behave the way they do): “Nobody has a ******* idea why. That’s the way it goes. Golden rule number one: never ask those questions.” Bell’s Theorem – p.2/49 Outline Quantum Mechanics (QM) Introduction Different Formalisms,Pictures & Interpretations Wavefunction Evolution Conceptual Struggles with QM Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Paradox John S. Bell The Inequalities The Experiments The Theorem Should we expect any of this? References Bell’s Theorem – p.3/49 Quantum Mechanics Review Which of the following statements about QM are false? Bell’s Theorem – p.4/49 Quantum Mechanics Review Which of the following statements about QM are false? 1. If Oy = O, then the operator O is self-adjoint. 2. ∆x∆px ≥ ~=2 is always true. 3. The N-body Schrödinger equation is local in physical R3. 4. The Schrödinger equation was discovered before the Klein-Gordon equation. Bell’s Theorem – p.5/49 Quantum Mechanics Review Which of the following statements about QM are false? 1.
    [Show full text]