The Entanglement

[Ignat]

Another interesting thing in quantum physics is entanglement, which is as fabulous as superposition.
The Entanglement in quantum physics is a phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more particles become so closely related that the state of one particle cannot be fully described independently of the state of the other, even if the particles are located at a great distance from each other. A key aspect of entanglement is non-locality: a change in the state of one entangled particle instantly affects the state of another, regardless of the distance between them. This violates the classical concepts of locality and causality.Quantum entanglement states that particles can be instantly connected to each other, regardless of distance. This contradicts the classical notion of locality, according to which interactions between objects occur through intermediaries, such as fields or particles, and depend on the speed of light.
The statement that particles can be connected and influence each other is not objectionable. Indeed, in any system, its constituent parts can interact. However, they can only influence each other within the system. So interaction at a distance exceeding the boundaries of the system is closer to a fairy tale than to science.

 

[SMyers]

if i had to distill this to one point, it appears to be the 'instantaneous' part that is the issue? meaning once two objects are further apart than the speed of light they shouldn't be able to interact 'instantaneously', which would require communicating faster than the speed of light. am i correctly summing that up?

 

[promytius]

I've noticed that not many bring up heat when discussing entanglement. Entanglement is tenuous, as something as basic as heat will disrupt the entanglement. What other forces disrupt it? Entanglement is sometimes portrayed as some kind of super power, but isn't it really a rare and special state that is easily altered?

 

[Greenlight]

how can it be proven that particles exist in multiple states simultaneously? any measurement proves otherwise. It's more likely that when it's said that one particle "instantly affects the state of another" the truth of the matter is that we instantly measure the state its been in since entanglement.

 

[Classical Motion]

They use to call it the quantum effect. Mass can only exist in certain quantum states. And this remains a mystery to them.

Mass reacts to stimuli. That means if you shine it, push it, or act upon it, it reacts and changes in that reaction. It’s bouncy. That’s because mass itself, is an acceleration.

And many believe this change…. is a state.

The silliest thing I’ve heard is “field collapse”. Remember that.

We have heard of the new type fusion process, call ignition. They zap mass with lasers, for heat. When they zapped it…….the matter was lost. It disappeared. They couldn’t find the particle target. So they fooled around with this for a while and guess what? It was not a field collapse……. It was a particle collapse. The particle contracted to a very small size. They had a heck of a time time trying to find it.

This was predicted over one hundred years ago, with the physical model I use for mass and matter. In this model, only an electron and a proton are needed in explain the periodic table.

The only way to observe mass is passively. With very weak EM fields. An x-ray changes all dimensions of matter.

CERN shows that every time you turn it on. Dissolving charge fragments. Not new particles...OR components of matter.

Matter can not be superposition-ed. Cosmos energy and mass has been dissolving and decreasing since the start. And the force of G has been decreasing since the beginning.

Just a hayseed opinion. Hay field physics.

As for entanglement, the common field so far is gravity. So try it again without it. Or a weakness of it.

 

[promytius]

how can it be proven that particles exist in multiple states simultaneously? any measurement proves otherwise. It's more likely that when it's said that one particle "instantly affects the state of another" the truth of the matter is that we instantly measure the state its been in since entanglement.

Setting aside the uncertainty principle, my understanding is that the entanglement is not a communication system; it is simply that a positional change in one causes the other entangled particle to position itself in the opposite orientation; like a mirror.

 

[Ignat]

if i had to distill this to one point, it appears to be the 'instantaneous' part that is the issue? meaning once two objects are further apart than the speed of light they shouldn't be able to interact 'instantaneously', which would require communicating faster than the speed of light. am i correctly summing that up?

That's right

 

[SMyers]

That's right

ha yea sorry, can't help you on that one.

best i can think of is the idea of the wormhole. in theory it bends space-time until two vastly disconnected points are then 'touching'.... on a macro scale. perhaps there is some form of micro-level 'wormhole' tunnel system connecting every point in space, like a neural network.

i understand quantum, but certainly can't solve any of it lol. from what i understand it is magic and you can make it do whatever you want, so have fun.

 

[SMyers]

Setting aside the uncertainty principle, my understanding is that the entanglement is not a communication system; it is simply that a positional change in one causes the other entangled particle to position itself in the opposite orientation; like a mirror.

but in order for the second particle to position itself in the opposite orientation as the first, it has to "know" what the first's orientation is, and also instantly "learn" what any new position is. that is communication, of some form.

this communication doesn't have to come directly from the original particle, perhaps it is some form of network. but the information must be transferred somehow, otherwise the entanglement is one huge coincidence.

 

[promytius]

but in order for the second particle to position itself in the opposite orientation as the first, it has to "know" what the first's orientation is, and also instantly "learn" what any new position is. that is communication, of some form.

this communication doesn't have to come directly from the original particle, perhaps it is some form of network. but the information must be transferred somehow, otherwise the entanglement is one huge coincidence.

I was not clear, sorry; what I meant was you can't send data from outside of one particle into that particle and have its pair receive the data and output it to another input. It's a single bi-directional signal, if that's correct.

 

[billslugg]

Yes, the distant quantum state is decided instantly, but no it doesn't break any laws.
There is no way to transmit information instantly. There is no way to determine the state at either end without looking at it. When either particle is looked at, it collapses to a random state. The other particle assumes the opposite state. There is no information can be transmitted by sending random numbers. Timing cannot be used since the person at the other end does not know when the particle collapses without looking at it, which would cause its collapse anyway.

 

[Atlan0001]

According to the Heisenberg principle of uncertainty and certain other physics, it is possible to be in two places, two positions, at once, three, four, ten, and more positions.... All one particle at speed: all one spaceship at speed; cannot be pinned down either to velocity or position (a singularity quantum entangled at once in time across space in many spaces)!

For example:
==================

Tesseract - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

=================
Every illustration in particular!

Try one spaceship positioned in 300,000 spaces across 900 trillion kilometers of space in one second, the same second of time! A quantum entangled spaceship and spaces and not doing anything like the speed of light, much less traveling faster than the speed of light. At once an accelerating contraction of the local universe versus traveling faster than the speed of light.