2
$\begingroup$

In certain experiments we can entangle two photons, two electrons, and even a photon and an electron. It's also possible to exchange one of the particles in an entangled pair with a different particle.

In light of this, is it likely that everything is entangled, we just don't know what with except when we run these experiments?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

It depends on your definition of the word "entangled".

If you take the meaning "interweaved" , quantum mechanical solutions, the wave functions $Ψ$ of a system or an interaction , entangle all the particles involved because conservation laws impose definite values when a measurement is made, for all the variables and quantum numbers involved. That is the way the particle interactions have been studied building up the standard model of particle physics . Event per event is recorded with the measurements of the outgoing particles defining the interactions at the vertex, getting the crossections and decay amplitudes for the particles involved.

If you take the meaning to "entangled" given by the quantum information :

Quantum entanglement is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more objects have to be described with reference to each other, even though the individual objects may be spatially separated.

This leads to correlations between observable physical properties of the systems

For example, it is possible to prepare two particles in a single quantum state such that when one is observed to be spin-up, the other one will always be observed to be spin-down and vice versa, this despite the fact that it is impossible to predict, according to quantum mechanics, which set of measurements will be observed.

The italics mine to show where the use of the term differs from the experiments in particles in high energy physics and quantum computing.

The experiments at the LHC use energy momentum and angular momentum conservation of the entangled particles to record events as they happen, building up distributions to be compared with predictions of theory.

Quantum computing tries to set up systems where they can be individually used to have information about one part of the system even though it is very much separated from the whole.

So to your question:

In certain experiments we can entangle two photons, two electrons, and even a photon and an electron. It's also possible to exchange one of the particles in an entangled pair with a different particle.

Here specific quantum numbers are used to check on the entanglement .

In light of this, is it likely that everything is entangled, we just don't know what with except when we run these experiments?

In principle yes, theoretically one wave function can describe the universe, with the general quantum entanglement definition.

In quantum computing one is interested in specific quantum numbers, as spins that have an easy value, up or down, + or -, that are easy to measure and use.

My example of entanglement of this type in particle physics is the $π^0$ particle.It decays into two $γ$. The $π^0$ has spin zero, so if one measures the spin of one gamma, one knows the spin of the other gamma no matter how far it has gone, from conservation of angular momentum. ( It is impossible to generate a $π^0$ on purpose, as it is controlled by the probabilistic amplitude of the interaction that created it.)

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ the "quantum informational definition" you cite is limited. Entanglement is defined (in all instances not just in quantum information) as nonseparability of the wavefunction with respect to some bipartite structure. You can have entanglement between different degrees of freedom of a single particle (people sometimes talk of "hyperentanglement" in such cases, but it's the same thing). Even though the term is indeed more commonly used when there is spatial separation involved, entanglement should always be considered as a property of different degrees of freedom, not of different "particles" $\endgroup$
    – glS
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 13:56
  • $\begingroup$ @glS Do you have a reference link for this definition you give in words? $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 14:54
  • $\begingroup$ any introduction to QI will include a definition of entanglement. First that comes to mind is Watrous': cs.uwaterloo.ca/~watrous/TQI/TQI.6.pdf $\endgroup$
    – glS
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ @glS thanks, I could not find it generally. I notice though that he calls it "biparticle entaglement" a subset. and it is special in Q information theory, We do not get such a terminology in particle physics $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 15:29
  • $\begingroup$ I don't see any reference to "particle" in there. Maybe you meant to say "bipartite"? Yes that's the simplest case, multipartite entanglement is when there are more degrees of freedom/parties involved. When there are particles involved, the entanglement is between the degrees of freedom of spatially separated particles, but that needs not be the case in general. $\endgroup$
    – glS
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 15:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.