Brainlet here

Try to play to Bell's game with your glove box or with entangled particles and you'll see that you won't get the same results...

youtube.com/watch?v=tafGL02EUOA
watch video, easy learning!

youtu.be/ZuvK-od647c?t=6m

Imagine a wavefunction describing two particles. You do something to the wavefunction and it fucks with both particles. That's it. The only people who get upset about are Einsteinites who still cling to Newtom or Newton kn a surdace. They'll die eventually

The easy way to explain it, is that you have two marbles. One red, and one blue. You blindly put one marble into a box, with absolutely no way to even guess which one is in the box, and which one is still in your hand. You then ship the box to the absolute other side of the universe.

There is no way to know what marble is in the box, and what marble is in your hand. Not until you look. Thus, both colors are potentially in your hand, and will exist accordingly. When you open your hand, you realize you have the red marble. This means that the marble in the box across the universe is blue.

Now imagine that these are not marbles, but particles. The particles keep the identity of a positive spin and a negative spin simultaneously until acted upon or observed. Once one is observed, the other immediately collapses and becomes the opposite (red vs. blue). The reason it's described as spooky is because this happens instantly, faster than the speed of light.

Is this true?, so entaglement only occurs its because you know "A is the opposite of B"?, but you travelled that information in your brain classically before doing the measurment.

If I show the spin of B to a normie, he wouldnt know A is the opposite because he doesnt know science, so no entaglement occurs, therefore entaglement doesnt exists

I'll preface this by saying that I'm not a physicist and that I realise analogies aren't 1:1 to reality: This analogy is faulty. The red and blue marbles don't exist in your hand in a superposition until you collapse their wave function. The marble in your hand was /always/ red and the one in the box was /always/ blue, you just didn't know which was which. Why exactly is this "spooky" action? Is the problem that you just gained information faster than the speed of light (the marble in the box on the other side of the universe is blue)? Because I don't see why that can't just be explained as you gaining information in a "normal" manner (the marble you have is red) and then deducing something from that information you gained "normally" (the other marble is blue).

Basically, this analogy doesn't help me understand why quantum entanglement is any more interesting than any other situation where you apply P(A) = 1 - P(not A)

not the guy
yes the analogy is faulty because it implies your own knowledge of the 2 marble system somehow changes the predefined colors of the marbles
these analogies will always be faulty because small/isolated particles do not behave the same as an amalgam of particles like everyday objects
just like Schrodinger's cat it's a bullshit analogy that only confuses people because it makes no sense and seems utterly dumb for someone not into QM
read up on De Broglie's wave theories, he theorizes why that may be the case

"Entanglement" means that the paired particles are part of a single wave-function. They're really a single particle, no matter how far apart they seem.
The difference between them and the "marble in a box" analogies is that the marbles HAVE colors whether or not you look at one of the marbles.
Quantum "marbles" DON'T have colors until they're observed. Einstein thought this was ridiculous. "Color is there all along even if we don't know what is it" theories are called "hidden variable theories. Hidden variables do away with the need for faster-than-light quantum connections (which Einstein, of course, thought were impossible.)

Decades after Einstein died, Bell worked out a way to test this. Einstein was wrong. FTL linkages appear to be unavoidable. However, it's still impossible to transmit a message faster than light. The data at both ends of the system looks totally random. You have to compare the data streams to see they ARE correlated -- and that requires a slower than light connection.

Here's a good example of a "spooky" result -- by which I mean "it doesn't make sense!"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser
And it doesn't, according to the way we expect macroscopic objects to behave. But QM has, so far, always predicted the outcome of any experiment correctly.
Nobody "understands" it, which is why most physicists accept the mantra "shut up and calculate!"

reddit is leaking

someone said spooks?

>"it doesn't make sense
it doesnt make sense only if you already lost all common sense accepting esoteric bullshit qm interpretation.
it doesn't make sense in context of your schizophrenic world view

The best way to explain it to someone who doesn't understand it is to tell them to go get a PhD in physics.

Otherwise it's just popsci garbage, explaining it with stupid ass examples is what a parent does to an infant and this is no less the case here.

you don't need to be phd in physics to understand the concept of derivative knowledge. just by looking at today's date i can say what day of week today without looking at calendar. isn't it a spooky magic?

If QM doesn't work, then neither does your computer.
Glad you've posted your last shit, brainlet!

That ??? can be described as Statistical Mechanics, good sir.

Botlzmann still trying to shill his bullshit on us I see

...

Sometimes science sounds like pseudo-science, and pseudo-science sounds like science. You shouldn't thrust your "common sense", humans are always biased.

For some people it looks complex and esoteric, but it is only as complex as it's needed to explain reality.