time travel using entanglement

@wolfgang59 said
If you had a copy of Hamlet with a typo would you say Shakespeare was BS?

A typo? This has nothing to do with a typo.

Wikipedia is only useful for things that are largely undisputed. Anything controversial is often plagued with false information on wikipedia. That is just how it is. If you cannot accept that fact you might be biased.

@kazetnagorra said
The Schrödinger equation itself predicts quantum entanglement.

I am skeptical of that assertion.
I'll believe it when I see it.

I think it is a myth. Nobody understands it now. How could he have way back then? Show me the specific equation. Sonhouse asked you a good question and I think you should answer it.

@metal-brain said
I am skeptical of that assertion.
I'll believe it when I see it.

For the second time the relevant papers are:

"Discussion of probability relations between separated systems". (1935)
Bibcode:1935PCPS...31..555S. doi:10.1017/S0305004100013554.

"Probability relations between separated systems". (1936)
Bibcode:1936PCPS...32..446S. doi:10.1017/S0305004100019137

@sonhouse said
@KazetNagorra
So is it easier to be in a superpositional state if the number is 2 V 3 or 4?
I saw work showing entanglements of as many as 5 particles.

An arbitrary many-body quantum problem is generally entangled.

You are probably thinking of 5 qubits in a quantum computing context specifically. It is of course much harder to have those 5 qubits in a controlled environment than it is for 5 particles to be entangled in some way.

@metal-brain said
I am skeptical of that assertion.
I'll believe it when I see it.

I think it is a myth. Nobody understands it now. How could he have way back then? Show me the specific equation. Sonhouse asked you a good question and I think you should answer it.

The Schrödinger equation is a specific equation.

@kazetnagorra said
The Schrödinger equation is a specific equation.

Show us.
Where is the equation?

@wolfgang59 said
For the second time the relevant papers are:

"Discussion of probability relations between separated systems". (1935)
Bibcode:1935PCPS...31..555S. doi:10.1017/S0305004100013554.

"Probability relations between separated systems". (1936)
Bibcode:1936PCPS...32..446S. doi:10.1017/S0305004100019137

Did he predict it or simply observe it and write about his findings?

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/mathematical-proceedings-of-the-cambridge-philosophical-society/article/discussion-of-probability-relations-between-separated-systems/C1C71E1AA5BA56EBE6588AAACB9A222D

@metal-brain said
Show us.
Where is the equation?

I'm sure you are able to find the Schrödinger equation somewhere, it is the most widely used equation in quantum mechanics.

@metal-brain said
Did Erwin Schrödinger write an article predicting QE?

Yes.

Schrödinger, E., 1935. “Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31: 555–563; 32 (1936): 446–451.

When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled

@athousandyoung said
Yes.

Schrödinger, E., 1935. “Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31: 555–563; 32 (1936): 446–451.

When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time ...[text shortened]... ought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled

I already posted a link to that article. It says nothing about a prediction. Looks like mere observation to me.

@metal-brain said
I already posted a link to that article. It says nothing about a prediction. Looks like mere observation to me.

Predictions come from observations.
The Schrödinger equation makes predictions.

@metal-brain said
I already posted a link to that article. It says nothing about a prediction. Looks like mere observation to me.

It's a completely theoretical paper, it doesn't "observe" squat.

@kazetnagorra said
It's a completely theoretical paper, it doesn't "observe" squat.

Then quote the prediction.

@metal-brain said
Did he predict it or simply observe it and write about his findings?

How could he observe it?

@wolfgang59 said
How could he observe it?

From the link below:

Quantum entanglement was discovered by Schrödinger and later studied by Einstein and other scientists in the last century.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180516102307.htm

It says "discovered", not predicted.
Schrödinger did NOT predict quantum entanglement. Wikipedia is wrong again.