Are you being given wrong ideas about quantum mechanics by some physicists?

Answer 1

Yes, you are.

Wrong Ideas about Assuming a Quantum Particle has a Wave Function of Both Up and Down Spin

Since some physicists believe that each electron in an "entangled" electron pair with opposite spin has a wave function of both up and down spin and that by measuring the spin of one, the wave function of the other electron far away will also mysteriously collapse into the opposite spin of the one being measured first and they say the collapse of such wave function is a one time thing. That means once the spin has been measured, it will stay the same in subsequent measurements.

What they mean is if we measure an "entangled" electron in location A today having up-spin(wave function collapsed), the other entangled electron having been sent to a recluse physicist in location B far away without communication with A must have a down-spin at the instant of measurement today(wave function also collapsed). Since they say "collapsing the wave function is a one time thing", that means the entangled electron in location B will have a down-spin forever starting today.

One year later the recluse physicist in location B who doesn't know that the entangled electron in location A has been measured already may claim that the spin of the entangled electron in location B has a wave-function of both up and down spin and by measuring it's spin, he will collapse its wave function to get either up or down spin and somehow mysteriously collapse the wave function of the other entangled electron in A to opposite spin.

However, from the point of view of a person in location B who has had communication with A knowing that the "entangled" electron in location A has already been measured to be up-spin so the entangled electron in B must have a down spin, what the physicist in B claiming about the entangled electron in B having a wave function of both up and down spin and by measuring its spin the wave function of the "entangled" electron in A will collapse to the opposite spin is utter nonsense because he knows for sure that the electron in location B must have a down-spin and that the spin of the electron in A will not be affected by measuring the spin of the electron in B.

In fact, if the physicists in location A and B make a promise that they may measure the spin of the "entangled" electron in their respective location any time within two years after the separation of the entangled pair without telling the other when he will measure it, there is a possibility that the physicist in A saying the same nonsense if B happens to have measured it first.

My point is, if "collapsing the wave function is a one time thing" in ALL quantum entangled particles (I don't think it is ), there is no way to tell if the spin measured on an entangled particle is due to collapse of the wave function by measuring and by entanglement or if the spin of both entangled particles has already been attributed to at the moment the entangled pair was created without any instantaneous action at a distance at all.

I'm not saying that there is no quantum entanglement involving instantaneous action at a distance. But it has to be proved by using entangled particles whose entangled physical property can be changed repeatedly, so that instantaneous corresponding changes can be observed on the other particle of the entangled pair. Of course, quantum entanglement involving instantaneous action at a distance can be used for faster than light communication.

Wrong Ideas about Quantum Entanglement

There is a major flaw in the logic behind the assertion of some quantum physicists that "both electron in an entangled electron pair just created HAVE A WAVE FUNCTION OF BOTH UP AND DOWN SPIN" and that by measuring the spin of one, the wave function of both will collapse permanently so that when electron A is measured to have an up spin, electron B must have a down spin and repeated measurements will come up with the same results. Same goes for the so-called entangled photon pair.

Many people misunderstand or are misled into believing that in the so-called 'entangled' electron pair, or photon pair, the direction of spin of one particle can be intentional changed repeatedly and the spin of the other 'entangled' particle will respond instantaneously to spin in the opposite direction no matter how far away it is. In actuality that is not the case.

When one electron or photon in a so-called entangled pair has been measured to have an up spin, the other particle must have a down spin. Once measured, their spin will be fixed and cannot be changed. So where is the instantaneous action at a distance that they talk about? Some physicists say that the wave function of both particles related to spin in an entangled pair just created is both up and down spin and not determined until measured and the measuring of one will collapse the wave function of the measure particle into a permanent up or down spin.

Since they found out that the other particle will always have an opposite spin no matter how far apart the two particles are, they postulate that somehow the particle far away must "sense" the collapse of wave function of the particle being measured first and it also mysteriously collapses its wave function of both up and down spin into the opposite spin of the particle that has been measured first. They also found out that once measured, the spin of each of the two particles will remain the same when measured again. However, we are seldom told of this important fact so that many people think the spin can be changed like the ones and zeros of Morse Code and be used for faster than light communication.

Now the problem is why would those entangled electrons cease to have a wave function of both up and down spin after one of them has been measured if each of them really had a wave function of both up and down to begin with.

The probability of one of the two electrons having 100% up spin and the other one having 100% down spin in every subsequent measurement means, assuming each of them had a wave function of both up and down spin to begin with, that their quantum nature 'related to spin only' has somehow mysteriously disappeared when their other quantum properties, such as the ability to cause interference pattern, remain unchanged. That doesn't make any sense at all.

My belief is that each of the entangled electrons has never had a wave function of both up and down spin since the entangled pair was created even though it has other quantum properties. SPECIFIC SPIN OF BOTH ELECTRONS IN THE PAIR HAS ALREADY BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO RIGHT AFTER THEY WERE CREATED. The reason why when one is measured to have an up spin then the other one must have a down spin is due to THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM, not due to some kind of instantaneous action at a distance.

It is like when you put the cards in a deck into pairs of red on one side and black on the other side. You take a random pair. Separate the two cards without see them and put each of them in an envelope. No matter how far apart the two cards are, when you see one card is red, the other one must be black and vice versa. No instantaneous action at a distance is involved at all. I am not saying there is no quantum entanglement involving instantaneous action at a distance in all quantum pairs. I am just saying that quantum pairs that is found to have PERMANENT opposite spin no matter how far they are from each other is example of conservation of angular momentum instead of instantaneous action at a distance.

Therefore, I propose that the term COMPLEMENTARY PAIR be used to describe any particle pair known to have permanent opposite spin that has nothing to do with instantaneous action at a distance e.g. a complimentary photon or electron pair.

The term ENTANGLED PAIR should be reserved for pairs whose entangled physical property can be changed repeatedly and when changes are made to one particle, instantaneous corresponding changes should be observed on the other particle of the entangled pair.

We should understand that a quantum pair can be a complementary pair related to one property, e.g. spin, but also an entangled pair related to another property (Google :Intercontinental quantum liaisons between entangled electrons in ion traps of thermoluminescent crystals).

Only by understanding the differences between the two can we learn about quantum physics more scientifically without being misled by certain quantum physicists who lack critical thinking.

Wrong ideas about Schrödinger's Cat Experiment

I found out that Schrödinger's Cat experiment was actually a thought experiment devised by Erwin Schrödinger to illustrate the PROBLEM of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects instead of supporting it and the phrase "Spooky action at a distance" was spoken by Einstein to DERIDE entanglement interpretation instead of agreeing with it .

It is a travesty against the two brilliant scientists that time and again many contemporary scientists without critical thinking quote the Schrödinger's Cat experiment to support the absurd idea of the cat being both alive and dead at the same time and spooky action at a distance as example of Einstein supporting the entanglement interpretation.

My article above about entanglement shows that Einstein had a good point as far as an entangled pair whose spin cannot be changed anymore after the initial measurement is concerned.

Of course the cat in Schrödinger's Cat experiment can only be alive OR dead as Schrödinger believed. An infra-red camera outside the steel box can certainly confirm if the cat is alive or dead without affecting anything the inside the box.

In fact, we can replace the cat with a bomb triggered by the quantum device to avoid cruelty to animal. That will take away the excuse of those scientists to perpetuate their nonsense of a both dead and alive cat by not doing the experiment . The bomb certainly cannot be both exploded and intact at the same time before they open the box .

Disagreement on one major point, Erwin Schrödinger discussed his infamous cat in terms of quantum universes and Heisenberg's uncertainty. Considering the potential of quantum universes or Multiverses, the cat can simultaneously be alive or dead, exist or not, or be something entirely unheard of or imagined in this reality. Keep in mind that Schrödinger also pointed out that the observer of an experiment inescapably changes the conditions of the experiment, thereby negating any potential results simply by imparting the energy of his observation into the experiment (this is part of the reason that absolute zero is technologically impossible for us to reach--one can observe only absolute zero-ish or absolute zero-adjacent).