Notices
Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: Could entanglement affect matter in a black hole?

  1. #1 Could entanglement affect matter in a black hole? 
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    I know it's been observed that sometimes subatomic particles become what is called "entangled" which is a state where what happens to the one particle affects the state of the other. This is apparently true even if they're separated by vast distances, and seems to happen either instantaneously or almost instantaneously.

    I wonder if a black hole is able to lose energy through entangled interactions with matter outside of its gravitational field. This of course assumes that the partner particles for some of the matter it has sucked in has somehow remained outside of its reach.

    I don't know. I just thought it'd be a funny thing to speculate about, and this forum seems kind of dead lately, so why not?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    As I understand the title for your post was an other than the post self. Your asking if matter into a block whole sucks off energy of
    the black whole cause of an entangled connection to a particle out of the actual reach of the black hole.

    The particle located into the black hole had to derivate energy to the remote particle, meaning, the particles had to have been be
    being linked to each other.

    When they where linked, how could the one remote particle could have stayed while the other one didn't? I mean, one is now being
    amidst the black hole, while the other one was not.

    Steve :?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding the concept here.

    2 entangled particles, no matter how far apart they are, communicate their atomic states to each other in some fashion. What you do to one, happens to the other as well, right?

    Being inside a black hole isn't so much a state as a location. Maybe, however, the process of getting sucked in would have the effect of breaking the two particles' entanglement?


    I guess more what I'm getting at is....... I wonder if it's possible there exist similar means of transfering energy or communicating information to what physicists have found in entangle subatomic particles.

    Maybe it isn't exactly that interaction, but it stands to reason that, if reactions like entanglement really exist and are able to violate the known limitations of space, distance, and time, then there might exist other reactions that provide ways for energy to bypass the blackhole's gravitational field entirely.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    I don't have a concept, said honestly. To me that sounds like Scooby-Doo. Black holes are said to not even let light out of
    themselves. Of which mysterious link the entanglement could be to drain energy from the black hole to it's entangled particle?

    An other question which comes to my mind was whether there shouldn't be data being evidence of obscure collapses of
    black holes?

    edit:
    Collapses caused by the draining of energy from black holes. (This I stated not clearly enough. ) Or, don't you think a sufficient amount of energy, collapsing black holes, was not lost?

    Secondly:
    After reading again, I think I have not gotten the context of your post(s) fully. Would you link entangled particles to black holes only? Surly not. Do you did so to assign the entanglement to a source of energy?

    The mirroring of a particles state at an other position is something yet done with beaming light particles to and fro. About that, there should be information available.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    DGX
    DGX is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3
    This is an interesting concept. If, in the case of entanglement, by changing one of the pair its partner is intantly changed also, then the force connecting the two would be outside of the light cone. In which case it would require ftl travel. However, we see this in another force: gravity. By moving one object away from another the force on the second object decreased instantly (out side the light cone). In the case of gravity, however, the forces are caused by a dimentional link, in other words, the cuving of spacetime.

    So perhaps entanglment also presents a dimentional link, although most likely none of the four we experience. In which case, if one of the entangled pair was inside a black hole there is no sure way to understand how it would affect the other partical. Would it distort the link; or perhaps the link will remain unchanged as it remains separate from spacetime and the influences of gravity? I really don't know.

    Of course this is just speculation, but i thought i would just mention my idea.

    DGX
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Junior Twaaannnggg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    248
    Does entanglement necessarily mean some sort of energy transport?
    ANd I find that idea with the dimensional link between entangle particle fascinating. And when you think about it it's the only explanation. Nothing moves faster than light except space itself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator AlexP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,838
    People have had the idea of FTL communication using entangled particles, but it can't be done. The change is instantaneous over any distance, but it can't be used for communication because there's no way of controlling what state the particles will be in. As soon as you observe one in one state, the other particle instantly collapses into the opposite state, but there's no way of controlling which state will be observed, and thus which state will be observed in the other particle.
    "There is a kind of lazy pleasure in useless and out-of-the-way erudition." -Jorge Luis Borges
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Chemboy
    People have had the idea of FTL communication using entangled particles, but it can't be done. The change is instantaneous over any distance, but it can't be used for communication because there's no way of controlling what state the particles will be in. As soon as you observe one in one state, the other particle instantly collapses into the opposite state, but there's no way of controlling which state will be observed, and thus which state will be observed in the other particle.
    The observation could be done from a remote position, which takes more concentration on the observation,
    but... hurts less when moving your head in a jerk.?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    just thought of something interesting. could the messenger particle between entangled particles be the famed tachyon? by the way as far as i understand it is not energy that is transfered, only information. but now comes the question: could entangeled particles be the form of comunication of the future?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Chemboy
    People have had the idea of FTL communication using entangled particles, but it can't be done. The change is instantaneous over any distance, but it can't be used for communication because there's no way of controlling what state the particles will be in. As soon as you observe one in one state, the other particle instantly collapses into the opposite state, but there's no way of controlling which state will be observed, and thus which state will be observed in the other particle.
    Is it possible to simply note that a change has occurred and when?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    just thought of something interesting. could the messenger particle between entangled particles be the famed tachyon? by the way as far as i understand it is not energy that is transfered, only information. but now comes the question: could entangeled particles be the form of comunication of the future?
    You imply there was a messenger particle. How do you get to that clue?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 tachyon mistake 
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    Well I just thought that there should be some mechanism by which news of the observation could reach the other intangled particle instantaniously. What I thought I remebered is that the theoretical tachyon behaves oppositly to normal matter, meaning at zero energy it travels at infinite speed and the more energy is added the slower it gets until at infinite energy it travels at the speed of light. Or at zero energy it travels at C and the more energy is added, the slower it gets. I think the latter is true, so my theory goes out the window. Nevermind. But how does the information travel then?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 Re: tachyon mistake 
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    What I thought I remebered is that the theoretical tachyon behaves oppositly to normal matter, meaning at zero energy it travels at infinite speed and the more energy is added the slower it gets until at infinite energy it travels at the speed of light.
    That is right! because tachyons cant slow down to c, right?
    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    Well I just thought that there should be some mechanism by which news of the observation could reach the other intangled particle instantaniously. What I thought I remebered is that the theoretical tachyon behaves oppositly to normal matter, meaning at zero energy it travels at infinite speed and the more energy is added the slower it gets until at infinite energy it travels at the speed of light. Or at zero energy it travels at C and the more energy is added, the slower it gets. I think the latter is true, so my theory goes out the window. Nevermind. But how does the information travel then?
    Thanks for replying, which is taking me straight to my next question. Why do you think not energy was transferred,
    but information only?

    * sorry I had to edit my post again
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    i am just trying to figure this thing out. I realise that the idea of a messenger particle means the transfer of energy, but from what I have read, it is only the information on the state of the intangle particles that gets transfered, although I might have read an old article. But by what means does it travel then, if instantly?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    but from what I have read, it is only the information on the state of the intangle particles that gets transfered, although I might have read an old article. But by what means does it travel then, if instantly?
    Thats my understanding of entanglement also............. You move the two parts away from each other and when you alter the state of one, the same state change instantly happens to the other.
    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    which still begs the question: how does the information get tranfered? and this might be naive, but why is the transfer of information and of energy mutually exclusive?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    i am just trying to figure this thing out. I realise that the idea of a messenger particle means the transfer of energy, but from what I have read, it is only the information on the state of the intangle particles that gets transfered, although I might have read an old article. But by what means does it travel then, if instantly?
    Now there is the messenger particle traveling, meaning energy was carried over, as you stated earlier, as well as information
    was transferred only due to an older article you read? That's quite smart move.

    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    which still begs the question: how does the information get tranfered? and this might be naive, but why is the transfer of information and of energy mutually exclusive?
    Do they have to be mutually exclusive?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    I am simply stating two possibilities that i can think of. I realise that the accepted theory states only information is stransfered, but why not energy in the form of messenger particle? I am sure that all my questions have allready been answered. I just want to know what those answers are.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    stransfered
    ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    transfered
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Miller

    Do they have to be mutually exclusive?
    I believe you will be violating Einstein cop if they are not.
    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    you mean ftl travel?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by GhostofMaxwell
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Miller

    Do they have to be mutually exclusive?
    I believe you will be violating Einstein cop if they are not.
    coupéè de faux pas?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    coupéè de faux pas?
    ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    2 seater car mistake?

    I stopped french language at 13.
    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    It's about it's Sunday today I think.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    You refering to a thought experiment? don't know that one
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    I refer to the day of today.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    isnt that mercredi?
    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    yes its sunday. Why?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    which still begs the question: how does the information get tranfered? and this might be naive, but why is the transfer of information and of energy mutually exclusive?
    I have this question too. If the state of a particle changes, it has to have been acted upon in some way, doesn't it? I mean, the change of one state to another is a change, and energy is change. And doesn't change always require/expend energy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Wow,... the whole thing was becoming way static.

    Although I don't like the idea of a messenger particle. Sounds untrue to my ears. The state of one particle had to be
    'copied' to the messenger particle, the messenger would move to the other entangled particle to transfer the information
    of the state of the first particle to the second entangled particle.

    I imagine how the messenger particle crashes into the second particle. How could it stop in time before an impact?
    Then, what about the time it takes? The messenger particle was inert additionally, I mean. The information of the state
    of the first entangled particle was not to transfer immediately with a helping messenger particle. It would consume too
    much time as well as energy. I think the connection between them had to be constant to allow an instantaneous transfer
    of the information of the state of one particle to the other.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    DGX
    DGX is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3
    I agree, a messenger particle would be very complex to model and explain given the current understanding of the laws of physics. That is why i put for my 'dimentional' idea earlier in this forum. By having a dimentional link, such as i described, you transfer information without the necessity of a particle which defies the laws of physics, e.g. the speed of light and the problems caused by the mechanics of the 'messenger particles' travel.

    Perhaps, this links in with string theory (long shot here ), as waves in higher dimentions cause these entangle particles to behaved in this improbable way.

    Again, this is all just speculation.

    DGX
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    Just to make sure: messenger particles are the way forces are carried out? How does it work? Are messenger particles massive? Do they travel at C?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    Just to make sure: messenger particles are the way forces are carried out? How does it work? Are messenger particles massive? Do they travel at C?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

    If I'm right, we discuss the concept of a messenger particle in relation to entangled particles. It's not set in stone,
    at this stage and probably don't will be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •