If that were actually happening it would be astounding. But they never measure the particle in one arm and the spin in the other in the same run. They conduct different experiments for the two results. The two experiments have different conditional probabilities. In the first run the particle can only be in one arm of the experiment. The changes made for the “grin” experiment break this condition though. So the particle can be in the same place as the “grin”. In short, there is no evidence the property was dissociated.
Why is the particle dissociating from its properties not interesting?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJDWPLlI5I4
If that were actually happening it would be astounding. But they never measure the particle in one arm and the spin in the other in the same run. They conduct different experiments for the two results. The two experiments have different conditional probabilities. In the first run the particle can only be in one arm of the experiment. The changes made for the “grin” experiment break this condition though. So the particle can be in the same place as the “grin”. In short, there is no evidence the property was dissociated.
This is want I thought when reading the article.
There will have to be a lot more proof, before I can accept this.
Extraordinary claims and all that…