Table of Contents
Quantum entanglement is said to occur when there is physical interaction between tiny particles, such as electron or protons or even between huge particles, which then become separated (Reed, 2012). Quantum entanglement is a quantum automatic occurrence in which the quantum positions of two or even more particles are described in relation to each other despite the fact there might be a distance between them. This phenomenon leads to the association between the physical properties of systems that can be observed. For instance, it is practical to arrange two particles in the same quantum state in such a way that when one of the particles is observed to rotate up, the other one is observed to rotate down or the vice-versa. However, according to quantum mechanics, it is impracticable to calculate, which set of dimensions will be observed in such an interaction (Reed, 2012). Therefore, the aim is to establish the manner in which scientific methods holds up in the face of quantum entanglement.
How the Scientific Method holds up in the face of Quantum Entanglement
According to Copenhagen understanding of quantum mechanics, the collective state of these particles in entanglement remains imprecise until it is calculated (O'Brien 2012). As O’Brien (2012) explains, owing to the fact that quantum entanglement is able to show the association of the results obtained from an entangled pair of particles, it means that the correlation can be established even with entangled pair of particles that are randomly separated. However, it is argued that quantum entanglement does not enable the matter to pass accurate information further than a certain speed limit known as relativistic and the standard space-time. The quantum entanglement behavior is said to be valid according to “quantum mechanical theory” because it has been tested experimentally and is acknowledged by many physicists (Mittelstaedt, 2004)). However, there are debates on the scientific validity of this observation. Many physicists argue that a standard fundamental method should exist to verify the correlation that takes place instantly even when the distance separating the entangled particles is large. The differences in views draw support from the various elucidations of quantum mechanics.
The 1927 Copenhagen interpretation originating from Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in the corporation with Copenhagen is a standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. Bohr and Heisenberg applied the knowledge of the wave function originally the idea of Max Bornto to interpret quantum entanglement (Steward, 2008). This Copenhagen interpretation takes questions such as “what was the initial position of the particle before it as measured” as being worthless. The measurement procedure arbitrarily locates precisely one of the much likelihood presented by the state’s wave function in an approach that conforms with clearly defined possibilities allocated to each potential state. According to this interpretation, the interaction of an external observer to the quantum system is the source of collapse of the wave function. Therefore, Heisenberg argues that certainty lies in the observations made and not the movements of the particles.
Despite its various criticisms, quantum entanglement has proven scientific because it was validated through several experiments. These experiments proved that quantum entanglement was valid and a basic feature of quantum mechanics. Quantum entanglement idea is currently widely applied in communication and calculation. However, as Mittelstaedt (2004) explains, quantum entanglement is scientifically null because it does not allow for transmission of conventional information at a faster speed than that of light. Many scientists also argue that the associations devised by quantum entanglement and seen in experiment decline the local realism principle.
In my opinion, quantum entanglement has various features that qualify it as a scientific phenomenon. The fact that it was validated through experiments makes it scientifically correct. The idea of quantum entanglement is still applied in today’s scientific calculations and communication process indicating that it is highly scientific. The detailed explanation of how particles get bombarded and then separate is still applied in interpreting quantum mechanics. However, there is evidence that quantum entanglement is scientifically lacking because it does not offer a complete description of the physical authenticity. This is because it fails to allocate joint values to both of two harmonizing properties. This shows quantum entanglement denies the fact that any measurement needed to disclose one of the theoretical values must essentially disrupt the system to extent that it alters the other theoretical value. However, in the situation described in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper known by the initials EPR paper, the measurement operates only on the second system, which does not associate with the first system. This challenges the rationale for the nonexistence of joint paired joints.
As in the discussion, quantum entanglement is said to occur when there is physical interaction between tiny particles, such as electron or protons or even between huge particles, which then become separated. It is a quantum automatic occurrence. Different opinions on what is in reality going on in the quantum entanglement process can be associated to diverse explanations of quantum mechanics. Despite its various weaknesses, quantum entanglement has been proved by various experiments as scientifically valid, and this explains why it has various appliances in the evolving technologies including quantum calculation as well as quantum cryptography. Quantum entanglement has also been applied in validating quantum teleportation through experiments. Quantum entanglement has also provoked several theoretical oriented debates concerning the quantum theory. Therefore, the scientific method still holds up in the face of quantum entanglement.