In our previous paper [1] we claim that based on conservation laws (e.g. spin, angular momentum, gravity, time dilation etc.) in some cases, matter and antimatter pairs (e.g. electron and positron pair) produced from photonic pure energy are entangled. Furthermore, if there are two identical pair production procedures ,A & B ,and an electron from entangled pair A annihilates with the positron of entangled pair B ,from conservation laws consideration the left behind positron from pair A and the left behind electron from pair B become entangled and we will refer to this event as entanglement transfer (Fig. 1).This phenomena can be examined at the LHC and if proven to be correct it is another proof that entanglement is truly a “spooky action at a distance” (EPR paradox) .As we will explain in this paper, This phenomena of entanglement transfer can be used for non-local communication applications.
In our previous paper [1] we claim that based on conservation laws (e.g. spin, angular momentum, gravity, time dilation etc.) in some cases, matter and antimatter pairs (e.g. electron and positron pair) produced from photonic pure energy are entangled. Furthermore, if there are two identical pair production procedures ,A & B ,and an electron from entangled pair A annihilates with the positron of entangled pair B ,from conservation laws consideration the left behind positron from pair A and the left behind electron from pair B become entangled and we will refer to this event as entanglement transfer (Fig. 1).This phenomena can be examined at the LHC and if proven to be correct it is another proof that entanglement is truly a “spooky action at a distance” (EPR paradox) .As we will explain in this paper, This phenomena of entanglement transfer can be used for non-local communication applications.
A system of two polarized photons in singlet state appears as being in one of two product states independent of any measurement. These states depend on the selected polarization angles. With the polarizers on either side perpendicular to each other, both photons pass the polarizers without any disturbance. Action at a distance is therefore not needed to explain the results of the measurements. In general, the elements of physical reality demanded by EPR are the polarization states of the two photons of the entangled pair. As these are local elements in the regions of space of the polarizers the EPR paradox for the case of entangled photons can be regarded as resolved.
The progress of physics in the twentieth century is deeply associated with the discovery of the theory of relativity and the quantum theory. Relativistic and quantum theories form the basis of modern understanding of the surrounding world. The dependence of space distances between events on the frame of reference is usually called the relativistic length contraction or Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction of a moving body. In transition from one reference frame to another by Galilean transformations, the time interval between any two events remains the same as well as the distance between the space points where the events occurred. One photon of a sufficient energy can generate an electron-positron pair only in the presence of some other particle that would provide the fulfillment of the law of momentum conservation. In the latter case the energy and the momentum conservation laws for an act of a photon emission by a free moving atom.
Entanglement can be understood as an extraordinary degree of correlation between states of quantum systems – a correlation that cannot be given an explanation in terms of something like a common cause. Entanglement can occur between two or more quantum systems, and the most interesting case is when these correlations occur between systems that are space-like separated, meaning that changes made to one system are immediately correlated with changes in a distant system even though there is no time for a signal to travel between them. In this case one says that quantum entanglement leads to non-local correlations, or non-locality. More precisely, entanglement can be defined in the following way. Consider two particles, A and B, whose (pure) states can be represented by the state vectors ψA and ψB. Instead of representing the state of each particle individually, one can represent the composite two-particle system by another wavefunction, Ψ AB. If the two particles are unentangled , then the composite state is just the tensor product of the states of the components: Ψ AB = ψ A ⊗ ψ B; the state is then said to be factorable (or separable). If the particles are entangled, however, then the state of the composite system cannot be written as such a product of a definite state for A and a definite state for B. This is how an entangled state is defined for pure states: a state is entangled if and only if it cannot be factored: Ψ AB ≠ ψ A ⊗ ψ B.
We show that the electron-positron annihilation process resulting with the creation of two gamma photons cannot be fully determined without the conservation of the angular momentum which has two elements, namely, the conservation of the spin angular momentum and the conservation of the quantum flux which work as the conservation of the magnetic moments as well. The conservation of the quantum flux has never been considered so far for any collision process. We show that the missing conservation rule in the above process is the conservation of the total quantum flux which is the hidden variable of that process. By using the quantum entanglement together with the conservation of the quantum flux we show that the initial and the final states of this collision are fully determined. We also show that each of the gamma photons created in the end carries a quantum flux of ±Φ=±hc/e with itself along the propagation direction. Here the (+) and (−) signs correspond to the right hand and left circular helicity, respectively.
Introduction We will now turn to quantum entanglements and their contemporary, possibly practical, interest. Entanglements, first discussed in the E.P.R. paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, 1935) are a perplexing nonlocal feature of quantum mechanics. This was immediately and succinctly discussed by Schrödinger (1935). The long history of this apparent paradox is outlined in the wonderful book of Jammer (1974). We will not focus on the central issue of “hidden variables” and their resolution by the Bell inequalities (Bell, 1964) and the test, nor the failure, of these in experiment (see Fry, 1998). The distinctive quantum nature of entanglements has led to two quantum effects which we will discuss: quantum information teleportation (Zeilenger, 1998) and quantum computation by means of entangled states. A nice, recent, elementary introduction to the latter is in the Los Alamos reports of James and Kwiat (2002). The quantum correlations or entanglements are sensitive to environmental destruction. This was pointed out early by Zurek, who termed this “decoherence.” The loss of coherence may occur on a short time scale. Recent discussions have been given by Zurek (2002, 2003). We have already given a theoretical example early in Chapter 2. It is pertinent to discuss this here, since it is a property of opensystem quantum master equations that is a central part of our study in this book. In a sense, the decoherence of correlations has turned out to be a “practical” application of these theoretical notions. Are there remedies for unwanted decoherence? Quantum error correction is a possibility. This will be mentioned also. Entanglements: foundations Following the reading of the E.P.R. paper, Schrödinger (1935b) quickly repeated the argument from quantum theory, but more generally. He introduced the term “entanglement” to describe what he seemed to agree was a curious, if not unacceptable, property. Let us follow his point of view. Given a state ψ ( x, y ) of a composite system of particles x and y formed in their mutual interaction. ψ ( x , y ) is not a product state.
Observation of quantum entanglement in ΛΛˉ pair production via electron-positron annihilation
We report the observation of quantum entanglement in ΛΛˉ pairs produced via electron-positron annihilation, specifically through the decay J/ψ→ΛΛˉ. By analyzing the angular correlations of the subsequent weak decays Λ→pπ− and Λˉ→pˉπ+, we derive normalized observables Oi(i=0,1,…,4) that distinguish entangled states from separable ones. Theoretical predictions for these observables are established, with violations of separable-state bounds serving as unambiguous signatures of entanglement. Experimental measurements at cosθΛ=0 yield O1minObserved=−0.7374±0.0011±0.0016, significantly exceeding the classical limit of −0.5 with a statistical significance of 124.9σ. For ∣cosθΛ∣<0.4883, the observed O1Observed consistently exhibits O1Observed<−21 with a statistical significance of at least 5σ. Since 69.3% of the decay events involving Λ→p+π− and Λˉ→pˉ+π+ are spacelike-separated, our results confirming the persistence of quantum entanglement in the ΛΛˉ system provide strong support for the non-locality of quantum mechanics. The findings are consistent with theoretical expectations under decoherence-free conditions, highlighting the potential of hyperon pairs as probes for fundamental quantum phenomena.