I am reading Modern Quantum Mechanics by Sakurai for my semester. I read about the Quantum Entanglement, Bell Inequality and Hidden Variables theory, EPR Paradox etc. and got fascinated. I just wanna learn more deeper theoretical aspects of Quantum Entanglement in a systematic way(say a roadmap). But i couldn't able to search for resources specific to this topic. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Note: I'm a physics undergrad with knowledge on Classical Mechanics, Electrodynamics on the level of Griffiths and some of them from Jackson, Quantum Mechanics by Griffiths and Sakurai (approximation methods, angular momenta, scattering theory over, starting Relativistic QM), Classical Field Theory (most of Horatiu Nastase's book), Lie algebras (Gregorie).

  • $\begingroup$ Learning quantum mechanics and quantum field theory is enough for physics , because the word "entanglement" is just a way of saying that "there exists a quantum mechanical wavefunction describing the system." Entanglement" is used by people working with quantum computations and quantum information as a short hand for this, because they are interested just in the quantum number behavior, for example of spins, in a quantum system. To go deeper into entanglement would mean to specialize in one of these applications. $\endgroup$ – anna v Oct 12 at 4:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'd recommend learning quantum information / quantum computing. I learned a lot about entanglement in my QI course. I have to nitpick a bit with what @annav said and just comment that in theory not every wave function is entangled, although in practice, though a pure state can be prepared, states quickly lose their purity. $\endgroup$ – doublefelix Oct 12 at 10:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @annav That is like saying that there is no point in doing information theory, because information is everywhere. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Oct 12 at 12:45
  • $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch I think I ams saying the contrary, that it is in information theory where entanglement as an expression is useful. $\endgroup$ – anna v Oct 12 at 12:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.