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."
Here is a little reading material. Can you link the article you mentioned please?
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.
Quantum Vacuum Fluctuations and the Casimir Effect ... This is the zero-point energy of harmonic oscillator integrated over all momenta and all space.
OK 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-electromagne...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.
"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".