If entanglement has nothing to do with conserved states then will you please explain what it does have to do with. You keep saying the same things over and over, but none of them seem to tell me what it is that causes entanglement. As far as I can see you just keep saying that entanglement just is, don't ask how it works. I want to have a relatively simple explanation of how it works. An analogy is just fine.
It doesn't require an analogy it's not that hard to understand just follow the actual science
Go back to 2008 and the then cutting edge of science made an astounding prediction which is almost as astounding as the higgs
It's a fairly simple premise
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080430/full/453022a.html
Now, however, there are strong signs that the transition can be understood as something that emerges quite naturally and inevitably from quantum theory. If that's so, it implies that 'classicality' is at root simply another quantum phenomenon. "There's good reason to believe that we are just as much part of the quantum world as are the tiny atoms and electrons that sparked quantum theory in the first place,"
what you are trying to understand is this part
Thus, one of the key questions in understanding the quantum–classical transition is what happens to the superpositions as you go up that atoms-to-apples scale? Exactly when and how does 'both/and' become 'either/or'?
The answer proposed tested and verified is this one
Decoherence also predicts that the quantum–classical transition isn't really a matter of size, but of time. The stronger a quantum object's interactions are with its surroundings, the faster decoherence kicks in. So larger objects, which generally have more ways of interacting, decohere almost instantaneously, transforming their quantum character into classical behaviour just as quickly. For example, if a large molecule could be prepared in a superposition of two positions just 10 ångstroms apart, it would decohere because of collisions with the surrounding air molecules in about 10−17 seconds. Decoherence is unavoidable to some degree. Even in a perfect vacuum, particles will decohere through interactions with photons in the omnipresent cosmic microwave background.
The last sentence of that is important because it also kills some old arguments so I will separate it and explain.
Even in a perfect vacuum, particles will decohere through interactions with photons in the omnipresent cosmic microwave background.
It means the universe itself is an observer and thus it always has a solid and coherent ground state even without the presence of an actual observer.
Therefore questions like what Einstein asked
"Does the moon exist if there are no sentient beings to look at it"
The answer is definitive ... yes the universe is an observer referenced from the CMBR.
And of that leads directly to the current QM position
Indeed, this picture means that the classical world no longer sits in opposition to quantum mechanics, but is demanded by it.
So at this point the article then goes off into some basic testing that was done showing that testing on large molecules behaved exactly as predicted.
That is the process by which QM scientists predicted and created the experiments now of which hundreds exist to show you can entangle macroscopic objects.
The last six years has been spent showing repeatedly over and over again that the universe is quantum in it's nature and classical behavior is a natural phenomena evolving out of quantum behavior.
As sort of a cream on top proof of that was the discovery of the Higgs which is demanded by QM.
So as I have explained science says the following explicitly:
1.) Via Noether's theorem QM satisfies all conservation laws specifically against your argument it does not require entanglement to do that.
2.) The universe is built on top of QM behavior and classicality is a natural evolution out of quantum mechanics if things have superposition states.
So entanglement is an inevitable consequence of the 2 facts above you have superposition states in a quantum universe and that is all entanglement is nothing more nothing less.
QM scientists have spent the last six years systematically testing and taking on almost every area of science it is why I switched fields to it.
Just this week came the realization that there are some small problems with the laws of thermodynamics because of the implication that the universe structure is QM in nature. It's nothing exciting at large scales where all the current laws will hold but at very small scales things are going to break down
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-quantum.htmlThe bottom line here is we may actually finally have an understanding of why you can't have a perpetual motion machine and there are losses in all systems because QM seems to make that inevitable.
So there you have it QM is not so weird after all and you classical world would rise naturally from it.
