对于电子之间的纠缠，必须保证中间光子通道畅通，以维持全局的相干。否则只是隐变量情形。
下面对纠缠的理解摘自拙著：
So how to understand the numerous quantum entanglement experiments?
Or, what is their true nature?
For the polarized-light-entanglement experiment (Aspect, 2004; Aspect,
Dalibard, and Roger, 1982), the laser irradiates the crystal in the middle
to produce a pair of “entangled” photons. The polarization of the “entangled”
photons is measured on both sides. Each photon seems to know
the polarization of the photon on the opposite side and aligns with it. Entanglement
interpretation puts the experiment in a time orderly sequence: the
photon pair generation; photons moving to both ends like particles; triggering
the recording equipment. In this picture, the measurements on both sides
should be independent (Aspect, 2004), and it is impossible to understand the
correlation.
The understanding of GAI is that photons are not point-particles; they
are waves (see Chapter 8); the polarizers are involved in the generation of
photon pairs because they are in the coherence range of the laser. The arrangement
of the polarizers affected (feedback) the creation of the photon
pair (down conversion). We do not have three separate events as understood
by entanglement interpretation, but one “entangled” global event. When
the down-converting photon pair develops, it chooses one of the polarizer
directions because the photons are detected behind the polarizer and must
pass through one of them. The two ends are symmetrical. No matter which
end is selected, the correlation is always there (Zbinden, Brendel, and Tittel,
2001), as long as there is a global coherence.
For atom entanglement experiments, such as the “loophole-free” experiment
(Garg and Mermin, 1987; Hensen, Bernien, and Dr´eau, 2015;
Zeilinger, 1986), the “entangling” operation (connecting two atoms with
a fiber) makes two atoms resonate, and the resonant atoms are certainly in
phase or correlated at all times. Resonance is a fundamental property of the
wave.
An “entangled state” is one state that collapses after measurement.
Usually, we can only measure a quantum state once, but because the entangled
state has the energy of two photons, it can trigger two measurement
events. The two measurements must be correlated, and the second measurement
should give the same distribution. Treating the two measurements
of one quantum state as two independent events is the key to the former
“spooky” misinterpretation.
In the context of CI, the distance between the measurement equipment
is meaningless because the photon’s speed is infinity (non-relativity approximation).
From the global quantum state establishment perspective, all quantum
states need time to develop, and so do “entanglement” quantum states. If
there is not enough time, or the coherence is poor, the “entanglement” will
gradually disappear. All Bell experiments leave chances for the “entanglement”
state to develop, either by coherent driving or resonance.
In GAI terminology, we should understand quantum entanglement through
global causality, not local interaction causality, and count in the establishing
time of the entangled state.
The word “entanglement” implies interaction. There is only correlation
and no interaction in quantum entanglement, and we should not use the word
“entanglement” for the phenomenon.
StMichael 写了： 2022年 10月 5日 01:48
我有点被雷教授说服了。
在我这个实验中，结果可能是无差异的，都有相关性？
雷教授是不是你建议过的试验？所谓“非纠缠态”电子对会出现同样的检测结果相关性？