What are the theories for the connection between paired particles? Read something that said, when one particle is measured the other changes, and if the particles are separated by a large distance (light years), the change is still instantaneous. My question is what allows this to happen?
But the real question is have you ever been so far as to decided want be more as such within the universe?You can't hold no groove, if you ain't got no pocket.
God's non-locality. There's a reason Einstein equated action-at-a-distance with vodou... ... Excerpt from Wiki "More generally 'action at a distance' describes the failure of early atomistic and mechanistic theories which sought to reduce all physical interaction to collision." -- In other words, there's a lot more to reality than materialistic, rigidly impenetrable, and vacuous balls bouncing off of each other. http://www.plim.org/nonlocal.htm
Quantum entanglement has been a topic of philosophizing in my small circle of friends for some time. Its a very interesting phenomenon and my mind reels from the possibilities connected with it. I mean if it can be sustained and controlled correctly it could revolutionize communication. Instantaneous transfer of information between devices no matter the distance is mind boggling. It truly is a "spooky reaction at distance" as Einstein said himself.
[quote name="Malt-Liquor-Kitty" post="19386601" timestamp="1390415820"]Quantum entanglement has been a topic of philosophizing in my small circle of friends for some time.Its a very interesting phenomenon and my mind reels from the possibilities connected with it. I mean if it can be sustained and controlled correctly it could revolutionize communication. Instantaneous transfer of information between devices no matter the distance is mind boggling. .[/quote] couldn't agree more. The more I learn about the quantum realm the more i realize I don't know. You know?Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
The EPR experiment was based on two equal or twin particles. These tiny particles, called A and B, composed a system traveling in opposite directions from each other (See dia. p. 19). Einstein and his colleagues knew they could measure some aspects of the first particle A, such as its position and momentum. From this measurement, they could predict the outcomes of the second particle B traveling in the opposite direction, while not going near the second particle. What happened here is now very strange. Instead of disproving Neil Bohr's school of thought that said that any measurement on A also effects B or vice versa, the EPR experiment proved it. Whatever particle was not measured reacted to the changes on the other particle. If the measured particle A began to spin in the opposite direction, instantaneously particle B also began to spin in the direction of particle A. Since there was no force or energy transferred between the two particles, there seemed to be some form of information transferred from one particle to another. Einstein did not know how to explain this phenomenon and objected to the ‘ghostly action at a distance (The Ghost in the Atom edited P. C.W. Davies & J. R. Brown, p. 15).' Einstein PERSONALLY wanted objective measurement and facts. Simply put, imagine a light bulb that emits two particles of light that move in opposite directions away from each other. Note that even if these particles were at different ends of the universe, if particle A changed certain aspects of its momentum, speed, or course, then particle B would instantaneously change to match the movement, speed, and course of particle A. To resolve this problem the Bell theorem proves that there was instant communication between these two particles. This means a message would have to travel faster than the speed of light that is 186,000 miles /sec. between them. According to the Einstein special theory of relativity this was impossible. Bell showed there is non-local communication between these two particles. This communication is nonphysical and currently science has no explanation for it. http://www.plim.org/nonlocal.htm
And, now, Descartes asks... who is it that knows for certain, that it doesn't know anything for certain?? The physically extended body? I think not. For, I cannot know what your thinking just by observing your physically extended body, only you in that body can know of your own uncertainty.
It brings to mind a fictional computing machine called the "Ansible". A computer that could use the phenomenon of quantum entanglement to communicate between starships. Its was written about by a few little known sci-fi writers since the late sixties and also written about by Orson Scott Card himself in his novel "Ender's Game". It somewhat seems to be another instance of Science Fiction almost predicting the future before modern science can even be brought to comprehension. Wouldn't be to hard to believe that we already have this technology hidden away somewhere in a secret government R&D department. Maybe DARPA.
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19386680" timestamp="1390416729"]And, now, Descartes asks... who is it that knows for certain, that it doesn't know anything for certain?? The physically extended body? I think not. For, I cannot know what your thinking just by observing your physically extended body, only you in that body can know of your own uncertainty.[/quote] thanksSent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
Thoughts are non-local... When you open one's head you don't see or experience thoughts... just physical and chemical processes. "Know thyself and you will understand the universe." For, the truth of the universe is inside of you... and not amidst tangible externality.
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19387203" timestamp="1390423228"]Thoughts are non-local...When you open one's head you don't see or experience thoughts... just physical and chemical processes."Know thyself and you will understand the universe." For, the truth of the universe is inside of you... and not amidst tangible externality.[/quote] Were all made of star stuffSent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
From what I understand quantum entanglement doesn't exactly work instantaneously, it just appears to be moving faster than light.
Yet, stars are three dimensionally extended in space... So, how can a three dimensionally extended star, through however long a process, come to give rise to thoughts that are not extended with three dimensional figure or shape? I mean, can you measure a thought like you can a three dimensional brain or object in space? No, therefore, thoughts are non-local and intangible, as opposed to physical bodies and stars that are locatably tangible in space; inotherwords, theres a lot more to reality than what your sense-organs can experience (and yet, you can only know that by thinking).
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19387729" timestamp="1390430016"]Yet, stars are three dimensionally extended in space...So, how can a three dimensionally extended star, through however long a process, come to give rise to thoughts that are not extended with three dimensional figure or shape? I mean, can you measure a thought like you can a three dimensional brain or object in space? No, therefore, thoughts are non-local and intangible, as opposed to physical bodies and stars that are locatably tangible in space; inotherwords, theres a lot more to reality than what your sense-organs can experience (and yet, you can only know that by thinking). [/quote] my "thoughts" from what you've said is the reason we know about the quantum realm is because we can think not from what we experience physically but what we perceive mentally.Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum