Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

## #1 2011-01-08 06:48:38

LQ
Real Member

Offline

### I find quantum entanglement free black holes to be false statements

The black holes must be able to have quantum entanglements.

I challenge any scientist who says otherwise.

A virtual particle can never 100% re-entangle a photon, Since time and space in such a system does not apply.

"ScienceDaily (Aug. 16, 2005) — Consider that Alice and Bob are two observers at rest separated by a long distance. Each of them has a measuring device that detects, respectively, two different quantum systems. The state of the joint system is said to be maximally entangled if, for many copies of the state, any measurement that Alice makes is completely determined by Bob's and vice versa.

What would happen to their entanglement if Alice fell into a black hole and Bob stayed safely outside? We can model this situation by considering Alice to be stationary and Rob (formerly Bob) to be uniformly accelerated with respect to Alice. We found that although the entanglement between them is reduced due to Rob's acceleration, it remains nonzero as long as Rob's acceleration is not infinite.

It has long been known that an accelerated observer detects a thermal bath of particles whereas an observer at rest sees only a vacuum. Known as the Unruh effect, it is this that causes the degradation in the entanglement measured by Alice and Rob. Our results are a first step in understanding how relativistic effects modify quantum information, and they imply that different observers detect different degrees of entanglement.

This has important consequences in quantum teleportation between relatively accelerated parties, since entanglement is the main resource in this task.

###
This upcoming publication by I. Fuentes-Schuller and R. B. Mann will appear in Physical Review Letters.

The abstract: Two observers determine the entanglement between two free bosonic modes by each detecting one of the modes and observing the correlations between their measurements. We show that a state which is maximally entangled in an inertial frame becomes less entangled if the observers are relatively accelerated. This phenomenon, which is a consequence of the Unruh effect, shows that entanglement is an observer-dependent quantity in non-inertial frames. In the high acceleration limit, our results can be applied to a non-accelerated observer falling into a black hole while the accelerated one barely escapes. If the observer escapes with infinite acceleration, the state's distillable entanglement vanishes."

-Quote from sciencedaily.com-

If Alice acceleration is infinite, then the virtual particles cannot interact with her, due to time being dilated and length contracted to zero. If there is a virtual particle in there, it sure can't interact. A virtual particle can never ever become real and simultaneously interact.

Last edited by LQ (2011-01-08 07:44:22)

I see clearly now, the universe have the black dots, Thus I am on my way of inventing this remedy...

## #2 2011-01-08 07:00:27

bobbym

Offline

### Re: I find quantum entanglement free black holes to be false statements

Hi LQ;

Please forgive me but articles like that are the reason that I do maths only.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #3 2011-01-08 07:29:19

LQ
Real Member

Offline

### Re: I find quantum entanglement free black holes to be false statements

I know. Does there ever come over a physics expert here anyway?

I see clearly now, the universe have the black dots, Thus I am on my way of inventing this remedy...

## #4 2011-01-08 07:34:18

bobbym

Offline

### Re: I find quantum entanglement free black holes to be false statements

Almost everyone here is well versed in the vector calculus and everybody can do kinematics. The ordinary work and pulleys we have that covered but a physicist...

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.