Entanglement issues

The role of chain entangling in cross-linked elastomers is an old issue which has not yet been settled. The success of Flory s new rubber elasticity theory 0-5) in describing some of the departures from the simple Gaussian theory has acted as a strong catalyst for new work in this area. 

All the above theories attribute the enhanced friction in entangled systems to extra motions. In a crude way they speak to the main issue, which is the loss of relaxation pathways due to connectedness in the chain environment. However, all are rather arbitrary they select certain types of motion for examination and exclude others, while in fact the motions must be cooperative and interdependent. In addition, the theories have features which appear to be incorrect, or at least inconsistent, even within the limited realm of motions examined. 

With this trick, one can now handle processes where entanglement can be varied at will. The issue is the representation of quantum states of systems having the same material content although a large number of autonomous subsystems are identifiable at a Fence. This is physics and chemistry unified by quantum physics. 

Quantum entanglement between matter-sustained quantum states and those presenting EM quantum states is one basic ingredient in discussing, for example, Eq. (31) in Scully et al. atom interferometer analysis. Also, in Section 4.2, a quantized EM field was used. Some key issues were not examined there below focus is on one issue concerning laboratory (real)/Fock space [5] connection. 

A second debate about the completeness of quantum theory did not benefit theoretical chemistry any better. Superposition of state functions which is allowed in quantum, but not in classical systems, dictates that the former is an entangled, non-local holistic theory [3]. The famous Einstein-Bohr debates, although centred around this issue, became so bogged down in side issues that they never squarely faced the real dilemma that a non-local (quan-... 

---