trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

There are more entangled quantum states than non-entangled ones

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that there are more entangled quantum states than non-entangled ones?

Yes. Studies examining the volume of quantum state spaces demonstrate that the relative measure of separable (non-entangled) states decreases exponentially with system dimension, meaning the vast majority of quantum states are entangled.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 2 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

Papers [0] and [2] directly investigate the proportion of separable (non-entangled) versus entangled states in quantum systems using natural geometric measures. Both studies conclude that the set of separable states has a vanishing measure for higher-dimensional systems, while entanglement is typical, meaning there are vastly more entangled states than non-entangled ones as system size grows. The remaining papers do not directly address the global measure or volume comparison of entangled versus separable states across the entire Hilbert space.

Evidence for · 2
1998
Demonstrates that for composite quantum systems, entanglement is typical of pure states, and the volume of separable states decreases exponentially as system dimension increases.
Get citation
Życzkowski, K., Horodecki, P., Sanpera, A., & Lewenstein, M. (1998). Volume of the set of separable states. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.58.883

See more details
More for · 1
1999
Shows that while separable states exist, the probability of a randomly chosen state being separable decreases exponentially with the system size, implying the vast majority of states are entangled.
Get citation
Życzkowski, K. (1999). On the volume of the set of mixed entangled states II. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.60.3496

Related receipts
Receipt History
first checked06 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8206 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work