Timeline for Is there an intuitive description of vacuum entanglement?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16, 2012 at 8:08 | comment | added | Ron Maimon | @ArnoldNeumaier: No it isn't. I looked at what Summers says, he just says that the vacuum is entangled with respect to the local observables at two separated regions. For a free field, this is the same as the entanglement when you rotate the unentangled k-state into the x-state field basis. It's a not so enlightening statement. | |
| Jul 16, 2012 at 7:34 | history | edited | Arnold Neumaier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added an explanation why Summers' alternative notion ''works''.
|
| Jul 16, 2012 at 7:34 | comment | added | Arnold Neumaier | @twistor59: I added a remark at the end to showin which sense one can reconcile the two notions. | |
| Jul 16, 2012 at 7:28 | comment | added | Arnold Neumaier | @RonMaimon: But it is what Summers says vacuum entanglement is. As I said, there are multiple notions. | |
| Jul 15, 2012 at 21:34 | comment | added | Ron Maimon | This answer is not describing what people mean by vacuum entanglement--- they mean the entaglement between different field states in the Schrodinger wave-functional. This is something which doesn't refer to asymptotic particle states, and you can work it out in free field theory easily. | |
| Jul 15, 2012 at 18:26 | comment | added | twistor59 | Thanks, that's very illuminating. So the answer to my original question is "no" it's not possible to phrase the vacuum entanglement referred to by Werner and Summers in conventional ($\mathcal{H}_A \otimes \mathcal{H}_B$) entanglement terms. | |
| Jul 15, 2012 at 17:54 | history | answered | Arnold Neumaier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |