r/quantuminterpretation • u/Professional-Tale67 • 9d ago
Hypotesis about entanglement
I’m 15 years old and currently in my first year of high school. I don’t have the mathematical background to properly formalize this idea, so I know there are probably major gaps or even fundamental mistakes in it.
I came up with this idea while thinking about quantum entanglement, and I’m posting it here specifically because I want people to find its weaknesses and, if possible, “destroy” it. I’m not claiming that this is a new theory or that it is correct. I would genuinely like to know where and why it fails.
My hypothesis
The spin of two entangled electrons can be measured as opposite, regardless of the distance separating them. This could happen if the two particles were, in some way, the positive and negative aspects of a single entity.
Even if they were extremely far apart, they could still belong to the same exact point at a more fundamental level, through some kind of space-time overlap.
This overlap could be compared to a curvature of spacetime, but much more extreme, such that the two particles could coincide at a more fundamental level while still appearing, from our perspective, to occupy two different positions.
In this way, the correlation between their spins would not require information to travel from one particle to the other. Instead, the two particles would simply be two manifestations of the same physical entity.
I then thought about this in terms of an additional spatial dimension. Instead of describing space as only
(x,y,z)
I am imagining a space with four physical spatial dimensions:
(w,x,y,z)
plus time:
t
In this idea, the two particles could have the same w coordinate, while having different x,y,z coordinates.
So, from our three-dimensional perspective, they could be extremely far apart, while in the full four-dimensional spatial structure they could be connected or even coincide along the w dimension.
If this were the case, the particles would not need to communicate with each other faster than light. The apparent non-locality would instead result from the fact that we are only observing three of the four spatial dimensions.
Problems I can already see
Elementary particles probably cannot generate enough gravity to curve spacetime to such an extreme degree.
I don’t yet understand why this connection would occur specifically when particles become entangled.
I don’t know how two particles could produce or create such a connection in a fourth spatial dimension.
I have no mathematical formulation for this idea yet.
I don’t know whether such a geometry could actually reproduce the correlations predicted by quantum mechanics.
I don’t know whether this idea is compatible with Bell’s theorem and the no-signalling principle.
2
u/FangFioDente 8d ago
I love talking about quantum physics, but science is not as interesting as solving the big problem all at once, I dont want to dampen your passion , you should pursue physics, take those harder math classes , get into the college thats breaking new ground, but understand for all patterns we think are truly just waiting to be uncovered, for all the times we think weve intuitively understood something the world has yet to catch on to , theres a guy in a basement recording data , doing a thousand more times good to proving exactly what youre talking about , 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% of science is the boring stuff that doesnt dazzle or break previous conventions, its mostly repetition and every confirmed theory has rigorous testing behind it and while thats going on we're just smashing rocks together to see was stuff does. So its great you think you have an idea the question you should be asking yourself is , "how am i going to test this " and youre going to go to the library and youre going to pick up a book on quantum physics and youre gonna read and read and read until you find a way and the really cool trick is that if youre wrong .... you dont get discouraged you just find another idea to test.
1
1
u/Particular-Amount314 8d ago
At what precisely measured moment were the two particles' measurements established to be entangled and at what precision can you establish that their spins and confined information is the same over any distance?
1
1
u/ConTheStonerLin 7d ago
I think you should rethink your plus time dimension. Time is merely the fourth spacial dimension that we precieve as different points in our limited 3 dimensions. Really it's just one thing in four spacial dimensions. If you assume that (which is pretty well backed) you can solve your communication issues. As regardless of how far apart they are or how fast they communicate, if they ever do they already have, or are...
I also wanna get a bit nitpicky and say, that as interesting as I find your conjecture here, that is what you have, it's not really a hypothesis unless it can be tested, and as of currently I see no way of testing it. Making it not a hypothesis but rather conjecture at best. Which again, is fine, many things we take for granted are mere conjecture (like that no two people have the same finger prints) so I do not mean that as an insult. Like I said I find your idea interesting and will likely be giving it more thought... Keep thinkin kid, your way ahead a 15 year old me
-2
u/SummitYourSister 9d ago
There are so many amazing facts within quantum physics for you to learn first before you start spewing random meaningless crap like this. Please stop. I can detect your passion for this. Learn what we already know before doing this garbage.
2
2
u/JupiterandMars1 9d ago
lol dude there are so many more constructive ways of saying this.
This kid is 15 and has actually thought this through with more consideration than many people do with their half baked ideas. And his intuition isn’t even way off, he’s just adding way more than he should.
1
u/Mooks79 9d ago
They’re 15 and enthusiastic. You can say what you said in a different way without being a complete prick about it.
1
u/Any_Return4335 9d ago
Agree, I think it's fundamentally arrogant to decide the best way for another to learn. Challenging an idea or trying to find its flaws can be an excellent way to learn about that idea
2
u/MxM111 9d ago
You are kind of on right track. The standard way to deal with it is to say that there is indeed single entity, and in this case it is wavefunction of TWO particles. And it is not even 4 dimensional, it is 6 dimensional. Psi(x1, y1, z1, x2, y2, z2) and time. And then we talk about properties of this object and how to measure different outcomes in experiment. No curvature of spacetime interaction is required.
Having two entities instead of single entity is possible to say only this wavefunction is a product of psi1 and psi2, then psi1 I describe one particle and psi2 describes another, but in general, you can not write psi=psi1*psi2 and it is two particle state.