Is the following assertion sufficiently unique to merit a paper? Every absolute conservation law implies a corresponding form of entanglement, not just spin (angular momentum). Linear momentum conservation would for example entangle originating equipment with wave packets and help determine packet dispersion rates. Mass-energy entanglement would provide a different way to look at wave function "collapse," via nominally instantaneous exclusion of finding the same mass-energy at remote locations. I have no idea what $T_3$ would be. Even some types of approximate laws may have corresponding entanglements.
Tell me more
×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for
active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.
|
|
No. The applicability of entanglement to all conserved quantities was covered in no less than the original EPR paper. @PeterShor answered my question, not me, but since he put it into a comment I'm adding this explicit answer to close out my own question. Peter, should you happen by, please feel free to copy your comment into an answer and I'll re-designate that as the real answer to give proper credit. |
|||
|
|
