Lecture 5 | Quantum Entanglements, Part 1 (Stanford)

Lecture 5 of Leonard Susskind's course concentrating on Quantum Entanglements (Part 1, Fall 2006). Recorded October 23, 2006 at Stanford University.

This Stanford Continuing Studies course is the first of a three-quarter sequence of classes exploring the "quantum entanglements" in modern theoretical physics. Leonard Susskind is the Felix Bloch Professor of Physics at Stanford University.

Complete playlist for the course:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A27CEA1B8B27EB67

Stanford Continuing Studies: http://continuingstudies.stanford.edu/

About Leonard Susskind: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/people/faculty/sussk...

Stanford University channel on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/stanford

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Science
• physics
• math
• theory
• relativity
• equation
• formula

[landin048]

I can't see what he's writing on that white board.

[jasonmathias]

Right on! Thanks Stanford. And thank you Mr. Leonard. I hope this goes deeper into the entanglement. So far this has been simple

[DaMav]

This is a masterful series up to this lecture which is almost impossible to follow because you can't read the board. What a frustrating hr & 45 minutes. I hope they fired the AV responsible; this isn't exactly rocket science to figure out there's a problem and correct it.

[burridheut]

Trick: To see better what is written on the white board, if you are watching from a laptop, put the lid in an angle of 135 degrees or more related to the keyboard. You will see MUCH better! :)

[grunder20]

give me more so I can understand all of this.

[agapitoflores001]

This one help me a lot in understanding the topic.

[CaptainImpedance]

Mother Matrix=[123456789,246813579,48­372659,876543219,753186429,516­23849] What is the Eigen Vector of this Matrix?

[Hythloday71]

@Hythloday71 - The trouble with Physisists is they are practical men, they R usually of the shut up and calculate philosophy. I recently heard Gell-man speaking of the non-parradoxical nature of QM citing the classic eg of the guy wearing diff color socks, u see one, u know the color of the other - he said it like it was the end of the matter - but this is what Bells Ineq exactly speaks to the prohibition of that kind of thinking !

[Hythloday71]

@Hythloday71 - classically 2 observers can continually keep track of them, in QM, in an entangled state, the observers can no longer agree about the existence of the grn and red balls, there is a new combined vector state of 'green-blue' ball. In reality we do not consider properties to merge like this - as they can with vector spaces. This point is beyond the assumption of Heisenbergs U.C princip It is a feature of V.sp

[Hythloday71]

@Hythloday71 - classically 2 observers can continually keep track of them, in QM, in an entangled state, the observers can no longer agree about the existence of the grn and red balls, there is a new combined vector state of 'green-blue' ball. In reality we do not consider properties to merge like this - as they can with vector spaces. This point is beyond the assumption of Heisenbergs U.C princip. It is a feature of V.sp.

[Hythloday71]

@Hythloday71 - 'a' grn ball could be followed and tracked throughout the sys. Now i know,QM says we cannot know exactly due to uncertainty, but the Bell Ineq discussion means abstractly, this prohibition is irrelavent, since nature, it's updates of sys, its allowable configurations of states of spaces, IS DETERMINED by V.sp. theory. This is a pure mathematical mental construct which undermines reality as one might commonly think. Consider the grn ball collide with red .. cont:

[Hythloday71]

How can he say that the difference between reality being described by vector spaces as opposed to classical logic / set theory is not profound? Clearly set theory gives a sense of immutable reality to our properties where as Vsp's hold no such purity of quantities. It is as if QM sys have a banker/ accounts, so long as the book balances according to the rules - all OK ! With set theory, reality is the banker, an instance of a set member could have 'a watcher' - ie the 'green' ball ...cont ..