No problem with stating that my personal opinion is that “I don’t believe in quantum entanglement”, even if baldly stated! However, since the mainstream opinion seems to be that quantum entanglement does exist, the onus is on me to provide a reason for my belief that it does not exist. Let me share with you my idea of quantum entanglement so that we can determine if we are talking about the same thing.Jzz, from your post #23:
" In short, my own view is that quantum entanglement does not exist."
Thank you for the interesting references and information about the latest scientific experiments being carried out on this subject.sam85geo,
Here is a little reading material. Can you link the article you mentioned please?
Thank you Cat, a great advantage in communicating with you, is your ability to look into new ideas and information while still keeping an open mind.
Here, for the first time, vacuum energy is equated with ‘virtual particles”. Leaving that aside for the moment, what does the present theory say? According to present existing theory, vacuum energy follows the sequence of existence, creation, and annihilation. Ergo, a photon spontaneously splits into an electron and a positron, this two particle and anti-particle then undergoes mutual annihilation the product of which is a photon of exactly the same energy as the original photon. Amazingly, quantum field theory tries to fit this strange theory around the creation and propagation of radio-waves.Vacuum energy can also be thought of in terms of virtual particles (also known as vacuum fluctuations) which are created and destroyed out of the vacuum. These particles are always created out of the vacuum in particle–antiparticle pairs, which in most cases shortly annihilate each other and disappear.
The above statement is like saying that the ocean is filled with water, with no reference to what the water is made off or how everything fits together. As I had stated earlier the link at (#27) in this post explains ‘virtual particles’ and their interaction with matter in a far more logical, comprehensive and integrated manner. Anyone listening????Quantum Vacuum Fluctuations and the Casimir Effect ... This is the zero-point energy of harmonic oscillator integrated over all momenta and all space.
Sam85geoOK now; I never anticipated that my query about the possibility of quantum entanglement at the macro level would resolve into theoretical contention. Being somewhat parsimonious, I was attempting to obtain/glean an "insight" to winning at the sundry "rigged" lottery and other games operated by the state to fleece would be greedy types like I am. I have gotten two lessons from my query and these posts: 1: randomness is operative in fair games of chance, and 2: there is an entire "wealth" of ideas and ongoing experiments in quantum mechanics that will eventually re-shape our knowledge of physics/life. I actually learned something fascinating from these posts for which I'm appreciative.
I guess most people would be of the same opinion, the problem in modern day physics is the question of “what constitutes proof?” Most of the weird, esoteric theories put forward by quantum mechanics are based on the quantum mechanics logo of : “At the level of the very, very small (read sub-atomic) things behave differently than they do in the every day macro world.” The problem with this hypotheses is that no-one can prove or disprove the statement. Sure, experiments have been done like the double-slit experiment which quantum mechanics claim are infallible proofs but there are rational arguments against this claim. (See my article : The Double Slit Experiment explained from a non-quantum mechanics view point: https://medium.com/the-electromagnetic-universe/the-double-slit-experiment-explained-from-a-non-quantum-mechanics-view-point-ab648f029f9d )Jzz my approach to quantum theories, string theory, politics, religion and people with good intentions is basically prove it. Without independently testable results and openness to falsification, "whatever" is just theory.
With regard to your hard-nosed business man attitude of “No tickie, no washie.” Its at the same level as monks selling absolution on payment in the middle-ages, when superstition abounded. “No money no heaven!” But, even in those dark days I doubt if such superstitions prevailed as at present exist in quantum mechanics or if those ideas were so rabidly defended."There is no such thing as a free lunch". Lastly, for believability, a quote from the late 1800s by a street wise Chinese-American "No Tickie, No Washie".