Update: Described experiment with free electrons won’t work, this post needs rewriting.
Update (08/12/2015): This post is totally wrong. TOEBI 2.0 will contain the right description. As a sneak preview, locality is rejected (with an explanation) in case of entangled particles.
Originally this post was published partly for about month ago but I didn’t have proper time to finish it. Better luck this time…
Both of them comes for free and naturally with TOEBI (notice the new writing style for ToEbi). Locality is one thing that makes sense to most mainstream physicists. But in current QM, realism is abandoned. Let’s see what we can do about it.
Based on TOEBI, particles are concrete, rotating, spherical objects, just like a rotating ball or something hence realism is given. There is all the time “well” known TOEBI defined spin vector attached to a particle. Picture below presents the correlation between TOEBI defined spin and spin concept used in mainstream physics.
As you can see, there is a little mismatch between TOEBI spin (vector) and QM spin, so it gives me always an extra headache when I’m converting these concepts back and forth for example when reading QM papers. Bottom line is that TOEBI spin vector presents realism, it just exists all the time with certain values (a direction, a spinning frequency), measured or not.
The question goes, does TOEBI realism agree with QM predictions? It sure does!
Entangled electrons (or filtered accordingly)
Source sends a pair of entangled electrons (another electron has spin up and another spin down on some z-axis) into a measuring devices. What’s the outcome? Obvious cases doesn’t need much of an explanation.
Notice that TOEBI spin vectors are antiparallel and pointing through the plane (needed orientation in order to generate repulsion between them, Second law of TOEBI). Situation at the measurement ends would be something like this…
It’s quite obvious what kind of correlations emerge during the measurements with different angles. In picture below, particle heading to right is pictured from behind its trajectory (once again, not in scale).
Let’s consider that the left measurement device is fixed (it doesn’t have to be, but this assumption simplifies the example) and the right one is adjustable. Trivial cases emerge when the angle (in degrees) between measurement devices are 0, 90, 180, 270. For more information check out this Wikipedia article. But what happens if the angle is for example 45 degrees?
Does this mean that the particle’s trajectory is bent towards S pole in half of the cases? No it doesn’t. What exactly happens in this situation according to TOEBI? Approximately half of the electrons goes initially to the left and the other half to the right (in relation to a line splitting the above picture) before the magnetic field takes full control over the electron’s orientation.
If the electron goes initially to the right it will be always attracted towards the more powerful magnetic pole, in this case towards S. At this point, it would be a good time to read more about how electron behaves in a magnetic field from Introduction to Theory of Everything by Illusion. In case of the left route, things get more interesting…
Left side route makes the case, depending on a profile of the upper magnet in somewhat over 50 percent of the cases electron might flip “upside-down”. In those flipped cases, electron experiences a repulsion between the poles. But due to used magnets, repulsion from the bottom magnet is larger hence electron’s trajectory is bent towards N pole. In case of 45 degrees the correlation between entangled electrons would be \(1 – 0.5 * 0.5 \approx 0.75\) which is pretty much the same as predicted by QM.
Accurate results depend on a profile of used magnets and other factors related to the accuracy of an experiment. But anyway, based on TOEBI, realism and locality goes hand-in-hand. I might write another blog post (in near future) describing experiments conducted with photons on this topic.
With certain measurement device orientations one gets a different results as the correlation therefore multiple angles and angle orientations must be measured.