In the previous post, we examined the metaphor of electrons that "decide" their spin. Here, we focus on the temporal structure implied by that metaphor, and why it is a classic example of explanatory strain.
Gribbin writes that “at the moment electron A 'decides' to be spin up, electron B must be spin down, no matter how far apart the two electrons are.” This phrasing introduces a subtle but consequential temporal narrative: electron A acts first, electron B responds instantaneously. The appearance of cause-and-effect across space seems undeniable, but the temporal framing is misleading.
The correlation between entangled electrons is not the result of a sequence of actions. No electron waits for the other to act, and no information is transmitted between them. The “moment” in which electron A chooses is a human-centric way of narrating what is actually a constraint on joint outcomes. By translating a structural constraint into a temporal story, the explanation smuggles in the familiar logic of causal interaction: something happens first, something else reacts.
This pseudo-temporal framing encourages a kind of explanatory anxiety: how could the second electron know what the first has done without violating relativity? The mystery feels real because the narrative imposes a temporal sequence that the phenomena themselves do not require.
What is really happening is simpler: the system of two entangled electrons defines a structured potential for joint spin outcomes. Each measurement event is an instantiation of that potential. The correlation is encoded in the structure; it is not a causal signal or decision transmitted in time. Once this distinction is recognised, there is no need to imagine electron B being influenced by electron A, or to worry about faster-than-light communication. The “spooky action” dissolves as a product of our explanatory language, not as a physical requirement.
In the next post, we will look at the broader pattern of correlations: why it seems as though electrons are coordinating their behaviour across space, and why this pattern does not entail any form of communication or joint causation.
No comments:
Post a Comment