User:Boris Tsirelson/Sandbox1: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Boris Tsirelson
No edit summary
 
(42 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Nonlocality and entanglement==
{{AccountNotLive}}
===In general===
The [[Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle|Heisenberg uncertainty principle]] for a particle does not allow a state in which the particle is simultaneously at a definite location and has also a definite momentum. Instead the particle has a range of momentum and spread in location attributable to quantum fluctuations.
The words "nonlocal" and "nonlocality" occur frequently in the literature on entanglement, which creates a lot of confusion: it seems that entanglement means nonlocality! This situation has two causes, pragmatical and philosophical.


Here is the pragmatical cause. The word "nonlocal" sounds good. The phrase "non-CFD" (where CFD denotes counterfactual definiteness) sounds much worse, but is also incorrect; the correct phrase, involving both CFD and locality (and no-conspiracy, see the lead) is very cumbersome. Thus, "nonlocal" is often used as a conventional substitute for "able to produce empirical entanglement".
An uncertainty principle applies to most of quantum mechanical operators that do not commute (specifically, to every pair of operators whose commutator is a non-zero scalar operator).
 
The philosophical cause. Many people feel that CFD is more trustworthy than RLC (relativistic local causality), and NC (no-conspiracy) is even more trustworthy. Being forced to abandon one of them, these people are inclined to retain NC and CFD at the expence of abandoning RLC.
 
However, the quantum theory is compatible with RLC+NC. A violation of RLC+NC is called faster-than-light signaling (rather than entanglement); it was never observed, and never predicted by the quantum theory. Thus RLC and NC are corroborated, while CFD is not. In this sense CFD is less trustworthy than RLC and NC.
 
===For quantum states===
 
Quantitative measures for entanglement are scantily explored in general. However, for pure bipartite quantum states the amount of entanglement is usually measured by the so-called entropy of entanglement.
On the other hand, several natural measures of nonlocality are invented (see above about the meaning of "nonlocality"). Strangely enough, non-maximally entangled states appear to be more nonlocal than maximally
entangled states, which is known as "anomaly of nonlocality"; nonlocality and entanglement are not only different concepts, but are really quantitatively different resources. According to the asymptotic theory of Bell inequalities, even though entanglement is necessary to obtain violation of Bell inequalities, the entropy of entanglement is essentially irrelevant in obtaining large violation.
 
===???===
 
Further progress appears in the 17th century
from the study of motion (Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei) and
geometry (P. Fermat, R. Descartes).
A formulation by Descartes (La Geometrie, 1637) appeals to graphic
representation of a functional dependence and does not involve
formulas (algebraic expressions):
 
<blockquote>If then we should take successively an infinite number of different
values for the line ''y'', we should obtain an infinite number of
values for the line ''x'', and therefore an infinity of different
points, such as ''C'', by means of which the required curve could be
drawn.</blockquote>
 
The term ''function'' is adopted by Leibniz and Jean Bernoulli between
1694 and 1698, and disseminated by Bernoulli in 1718:
 
<blockquote>One calls here a function of a variable a quantity composed in any
manner whatever of this variable and of constants.</blockquote>
 
This time a formula is required, which restricts the class of
functions. However, what is a formula? Surely, {{nowrap|''y'' &#061; 2''x''<sup>2</sup> - 3}} is allowed; what about {{nowrap|''y'' &#061; [[Sine|sin]] ''x''}}?
Is it "composed of ''x''"? "In any manner whatever" is now interpreted much more widely than it was possible in 17th century.
 
<blockquote>... little by little, and often by very subtle detours, various
transcendental operations, the logarithm, the exponential, the
trigonometric functions, quadratures, the solution of differential
equations, passing to the limit, the summing of series, acquired the
right of being quoted. (Bourbaki, p. 193)</blockquote>
 
Surely, {{nowrap|sin ''x''}} is not a [[polynomial]] of ''x''. However, it is the sum of a [[power series]]:
:<math> \sin x = x - \frac{x^3}{6} + \frac{x^5}{120} - \dots </math>
which was found already by James Gregory in 1667. Many other functions were developed into power series by him, [[Isaac Barrow]], [[Isaac Newton]] and others. Moreover, all these formulas appeared to be special cases of a much more [[Taylor series|general formula]] found by Brook Taylor in 1715.
 
But on the first stage the notion of an algebraic expression is quite
restrictive. More general, possibly ill-behaving functions have to
wait for the 19th century.
 
==Notes==
{{reflist}}
 
==References==
*{{Citation
| last = Arnol'd
| first = V.I.
| title = Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke: pioneers in mathematical analysis and catastrophe theory from evolvents to quasicrystals
| year = 1990
| publisher = Birkhäuser
| isbn =
}}.

Latest revision as of 02:25, 22 November 2023


The account of this former contributor was not re-activated after the server upgrade of March 2022.


The Heisenberg uncertainty principle for a particle does not allow a state in which the particle is simultaneously at a definite location and has also a definite momentum. Instead the particle has a range of momentum and spread in location attributable to quantum fluctuations.

An uncertainty principle applies to most of quantum mechanical operators that do not commute (specifically, to every pair of operators whose commutator is a non-zero scalar operator).

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User:Boris_Tsirelson/Sandbox1&oldid=904361"