The universe really is weird, and a landmark quantum experiment proves it

What are you guys talking about? This has nothing to do with consciousness at all.


What I'd like to know is how they've figured out the resutls aren't pre-determined somehow at the time of entanglement.

Ive heard that time is an illusion. That events are actually all happening "at once". Perhaps space is the same, an illusion. All matter is actually all in the same "place".

Or something.

a reply to: 3n19m470

It's not quite that---if everything were the same place then we wouldn't have the effect of space, but we do.

However, there are serious people working on this very issue with some deep ideas.

www.quantamagazine.org...

In a nutshell, entangled particles are still 'close' together by being connected by some kind of micro-wormhole, therefore some sort of 'communication' to preserve all the QM correlation structure is still possible so experiments come out as we see them. But then when they decorrelate after observation, then you really do get true space without a shortcut, so they are separated after that and work independently.

This EPR=ER idea is now one of the hottest ideas in fundamental particle physics theory.

At long last, people might just start to understand the mechanistic physics and true structure of what appears to be 'spooky action at a distance' of quantum entanglement. Not just a "shut up and calculate QM cross section" excuse, but a true conceptual picture how it can happen from deep microphysics. And maybe, just maybe, it might eventually be experimentally testable? If it is, this is huge. [people will talk about the greatest physicists as Newton, Maxwell, Einstein, Bohr and Maldecena]

And 60 years later still, Einstein's concerns and his open issues are at the center of it, on the QM microsphysics side and the general relativity Einstein-Rosen wormhole side.

Now if you want to start science-fictioning, here's an interesting start. Think about about macroscopic quantum systems, superconductors & Bose Einstein condensates, which can do macroscopic entanglement. These do not exist naturally, as far as I'm aware.

If EPR=ER, then large scale geometry of space can be connected and composed of and created by quantum mechanics. And that means.........if you're really clever enough..... If the space in front of you is entangled with space around your craft and therefore not really as far away as it seems like......warp drive.

originally posted by: Tearman
What are you guys talking about? This has nothing to do with consciousness at all.


What I'd like to know is how they've figured out the resutls aren't pre-determined somehow at the time of entanglement.

Actually brain activity has an effect based upon Bells Theorem the result upon any other particle created at the same time. One could suggest that this effect is limited. But in context the theorem presents that time and space as we understand it, with respect to materialist science, does not apply.

An observer is required at the time of observation and that seems clear.

a reply to: Tearman

Good thinking, but they've done what are called "delayed choice experiments" which have ruled out that possibility.

The simultaneous lack of faster-than-light classical communication and the persistence and reality of faster-than-light quantum correlations is upheld over and over. You have to accept this is how the world works.

originally posted by: 3n19m470
Ive heard that time is an illusion.

on the contrary, just like your hands, time is a very physical entity

Just today from another thread dealing with this...

Pg.- 37

The most fundamental conditioning is that of "I am," the basic sense of self-centeredness. This is the sense that there is a thinker who thinks thoughts and who somehow lives in our bodies. This is the illusion that we have location.
Quantum physicists agree that in the subatomic universe objects exist in quantum nonseparability. Quantum objects are not located, they are not separate. Once having acted on another object, the objects continue to be connected. This connectedness is unaffected by distance, because the connecting force does not move through space. Close and far are the same in this regard.
...

namaste

a reply to: neoholographic

The experiment, performed in the Netherlands, was very technically demanding and only just managed to convincingly rule out local causality.

... what de facto only just manages to meddle with the concept of causality itself. Ups! What a shame, I really liked that one.

Oh dear. Schrödingers Cat is out of the box and nobody can put it back, we could use Schrödingers Dog now as well.

originally posted by: donktheclown
a reply to: InTheLight

Perhaps dark energy and matter may play a role where distances between quantum entanglements are always connected and perhaps where this light speed or faster (instantaneous) - no speed - is also a reality.

I think the key thing is that there really is no "distance." Instantaneous speed may need not exist nor would the idea of any entanglement, IMO.

Yes, if we are to shift our thoughts to a more open-minded state, then the 'all' is 'all reality' without any distance, just being - here or there.

a reply to: InTheLight

One way of looking at it. Is that when we perceive with the common human senses is in effect, the result of internal representations. Now that comment is in actually obvious. In example realize that what we perceive through vision is a process that occurs entirely in the brain.

We see what are brains are capable of seeing and to elaborate, this applies as well to taste, smell, touch and hearing.

In interest? How we perceive as to the common senses seemingly is applicable to understanding reality, to the extent humans do today.

Herein exists a fundamental conflict between classical thinking and otherwise.


How can what is effectively an internal representation of reality. Constitute an absolute, in relation to understanding reality as a whole?

Any thoughts?

originally posted by: Kashai
Herein exists a fundamental conflict between classical thinking and otherwise.


How can what is effectively an internal representation of reality. Constitute an absolute, in relation to understanding reality as a whole?

Any thoughts?

It could be that our brains are constructed to not only independenly interpret reality, but share some of it somehow... eluding to the possibility that all of our brains contain entangled particles with every other brain.... really going down the wormhole!..

originally posted by: charlyv

originally posted by: Kashai
Herein exists a fundamental conflict between classical thinking and otherwise.


How can what is effectively an internal representation of reality. Constitute an absolute, in relation to understanding reality as a whole?

Any thoughts?

It could be that our brains are constructed to not only independenly interpret reality, but share some of it somehow... eluding to the possibility that all of our brains contain entangled particles with every other brain.... really going down the wormhole!..

Why does it always result in a wormhole being present?

a reply to: charlyv

That would explain the collective subconscious mind. I like!

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: charlyv

originally posted by: Kashai
Herein exists a fundamental conflict between classical thinking and otherwise.


How can what is effectively an internal representation of reality. Constitute an absolute, in relation to understanding reality as a whole?

Any thoughts?

It could be that our brains are constructed to not only independenly interpret reality, but share some of it somehow... eluding to the possibility that all of our brains contain entangled particles with every other brain.... really going down the wormhole!..

Why does it always result in a wormhole being present?

Only in the context that quantum physics describes the adjacency (if you will) of entangled particles as a wormhole. There is no distance , nor is there any speed involved.

a reply to: mbkennel

Heeey! You a physicist?

a reply to: charlyv

"Almost 99% of the mass of the human body is made up of six elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus."


Consider that in relation to the OP we share a special relationship to these elements upon a universal scale.

Otherwise and in hypothesis imagine a planet 50 billion light years away from Earth. This planet has an atmosphere with wind and on this planet is a cliff. At the top of this cliff their is a bolder of about 50 tons (in equivalent) ,it sits upon a precipice to a 1000 foot drop. The only thing stopping it from falling is a small rock about 10 inches in diameter and due to wind conditions. At this very moment it is about to break apart, resulting in the fall into the cliff of the boulder.

Bells Theorem presents that given the fact that the Universe is interconnected and despite Space/Time. In reference to the moment the particles in our bodies experience, this one event as well as everything else that can potentially happen. Is experienced by the particles in our bodies.

Everywhere and despite distance every bit of information is shared by everything.

a reply to: Kashai

That is the long version, and I concur. Well said.

When I go out in nature for a hike, my reality and the universe are in harmony.. My ancestors did it for thousands of years, it was simple.. Nature gives you everything.. Einstein made a foundation which is relative to the information which speed it flows.. In my reality everything has an ending.. Nature is perfect, we are not.

a reply to: Hyperia

True perfection it seems cannot exist without the imperfect
as it then encompasses all things.

Any thoughts?