Quantum Entanglement

MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series

De: Jed Brody

Narrado por: Jonathan Todd Ross

Quantum physics is notable for its brazen defiance of common sense. (Think of Schrödinger's Cat, famously both dead and alive.) An especially rigorous form of quantum contradiction occurs in experiments with entangled particles. Our common assumption is that objects have properties whether or not anyone is observing them, and the measurement of one can't affect the other. Quantum entanglement rejects this assumption, offering impeccable reasoning and irrefutable evidence of the opposite. Is quantum entanglement mystical, or just mystifying? In this volume in the MIT Press Essential Knowledge series, Jed Brody equips listeners to decide for themselves. He explains how our commonsense assumptions impose constraints-from which entangled particles break free.

Brody explores such concepts as local realism, Bell's inequality, polarization, time dilation, and special relativity. He introduces listeners to imaginary physicists Alice and Bob and their photon analyses; points out that it's easier to reject falsehood than establish the truth; and reports that some physicists explain entanglement by arguing that we live in a cross-section of a higher-dimensional reality. He also examines a variety of viewpoints held by physicists, including quantum decoherence, Niels Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation, genuine fortuitousness, and QBism.

©2020 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (P)2020 Gildan Media

The complexity of entanglement

Generally explanatory with some ponderous areas to wade through. Overall an acceptable introduction using few math calculations

ad nauseum droning on examples

Chapter 6 was the only decent Chapter but assumes you understand Bayesian statistics which was completely antithetical to the rest of the book

True or false Quantum Entanglement?

If you are a true believer in Einstein’s “Spooky Action at a Distance Theory” then this argument against it, is worthy study for you and beginners. It will provide you facts and lay out analytical reasons why Einstein is wrong? Questioning your beliefs is good, regardless whether you don’t change your mind. For the beginning it is an alternate way of looking at Quantum Physics which will strengthen your understanding of it. Strongly recommended.

Quantum Entanglement

Concise and clear with good introduction to both conceptual elements and basic math underlying key concepts.

Not suitable for aural presentation

The section on Alice and Bob is unintelligible. Perhaps the printed version would be understandable

gappy and devoid of rigor

The approach taken in this book (reading functions, formulas, scenarios, and their variations) utterly fails in audio book setting. Worse, even in text format, the analysis is weak, gappy, and incomplete, relying on loose and wholly inaccurate language to make conclusory assertions instead of making any rigorous efforts to persuade on substantive merits. Finally, the core effort of the book to explain and analyze the tension between local realism and certain experimental results is surprisingly shallow and, simply put, falls flat. I was very disappointed.

Not a good book if you just want a concise summary

The details about polarization experiments of QM are overwhelmingly boring and long, made it a huge effort and patience to follow it. If you just want to know the concept of QM and not the details of the experiments, this is not a book for you. I could trust the results and the summary of the experiments, but the extremely repetitive details of the experiments made it such a pain in the butt to listen to it. In addition, I learned very little about QM as I already knew the basics and this book is just using this boring experiments to confirmed what I already knew.

Bleh

Really boring, author sounds like he’s trying to sound smart but doesn’t actually understand the subject matter. Idk not very well written in my opinion, kinda too long even though it’s 3 hours. It felt like an essay stretched tediously into a book.

Lost.

Boring, boring, boring. Not at all written in an interesting way and I was lost the entire time. I've listened to many books on quantum physics and usually enjoy it, but I guess this just wasn't for me.

That he judges people for how they think

Just because one person thinks another when it comes to scientific information or analysis or however, you want to observe whether it is in front or not in front of you you don’t call somebody ignorant, which is a polite way to call them stupid I could say the same for him