Quantum physicists shed new light on relation between entanglement and nonlocality

When it comes to space and time, modern physics defies our intuition in the most dramatic way.

Because space, time, and causality are a-priori conceptual intuitions of the mind. They are not observable entities themselves, but are the form in which experience must take given evolved a-priori intellectual faculties of the mind. (how the mind operates on, and organizes sense experience).

An intuitive understanding of reality implies that reality was forced to conform within this subjective conceptual structure,.. this leads to inconsistencies as reality is misrepresented in this relatively arbitrary and artificial form (from macro to qm scale). The minds intuitive faculties simply don't function consistently on the qm level. This implies that the underlying reality (to qm) cannot ever be intuitively understood. Positivism prevails over realism.

[this post was made to annoy GhostOfOtto]

The concepts of weak and strong entanglement can be understood with AWT, the water surface model in particular. The water surface plays an analogy of the space-time, the directions parallel with water surface are space dimensions, the remaining direction perpendicular to it is the time dimension.

At the water surface the observable objects are represented with solitons or wave packets, which can interact with both surface waves, both underwater waves. The mutual interaction with surface waves is easy to handle both mathematically, both experimentally, because just the surface waves are directly observable for us in the same way, like the transverse waves of light. But the mutual interaction trough longitudinal waves is something, which cannot be described with surface waves at all, so that only indeterministic, statistical approach of quantum mechanics has been developed here.

Nevertheless in context of dense aether model, these interactions are as real, as these observable ones.

"The minds intuitive faculties simply don't function consistently on the qm level. This implies that the underlying reality (to qm) cannot ever be intuitively understood."- Noumenon
And I say that all depends on WHO is intuitively understanding. I suggest you read the work of David Deutsch before you say never.
I am lodging a formal complaint to the editors of PhysOrg for pulling Erik D.Andrulis' paper 'The Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life. It was pulled by Case Western and in an act of censorship, Physorg followed suit without a mention of its reasons for retraction. Andrulis' work is controversial but no more so than much of QM. I commented on the similarity to the reaction to Wilhelm Reich's books, which were burned in the 1950's by the F.D.A.! Overnight, the paper by Andrulis disappeared, making me realize you don't have to burn anyone's newly published ideas anymore, just the touch of a button will erase all traces of it. Shame on PhysOrg!

Or maybe 'The Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life' was just pseudo-science and pantheism written by hippies, even more useless than neutron repulsion.

When it comes to space and time, modern physics defies our intuition in the most dramatic way.

Not really, modern physics has a lot to learn about space and is still clueless about time.

"The minds intuitive faculties simply don't function consistently on the qm level. This implies that the underlying reality (to qm) cannot ever be intuitively understood."- Noumenon

And I say that all depends on WHO is intuitively understanding. I suggest you read the work of David Deutsch before you say never.

I will have to look into that. However, the many-worlds interpretation doesn't solve the measurement problem, and still requires a conscious observer to differentiate one possible world from another,.. but I'm not aware of his point.

Or maybe 'The Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life' was just pseudo-science and pantheism written by hippies, even more useless than neutron repulsion.

-encoded
Here's a patent application from the "hippie" Erik D.Andrulis :
A method for preparing a cross-linked nucleic acid-protein complex; the method comprisingcontacting a cell with a stabilizer at a concentration and for a period of time effective for stabilizing protein-chromatin complexes, the concentration and the period of time being selected for specific stabilization of the interactions between chromatin proteins and chromatin; andisolating protein-chromatin complexes from the cell, the isolated protein-chromatin complexes forming the chromatome.
Now that we know Andrulis can run circles around you, encoded, consider making a retraction of your own.

Read more: http://www.faqs.o...kxYH7vh5

nonlocalamity: When the same bad thing happens simultaneously in different places with no obvious other connection.

We perceive reality in the way that best suits us. As with physical features, I would argue that our very perception of reality was likely selected for by natural selection. Can you imagine if we had microscope eyes, seeing 500x magnification compared to what we see now but only 1/500th of the field of view? That would change our perception of reality immensely, but it would also cripple us and leave us susceptible to predators and self injury.

My point is, our perception of reality leads to what we consider "intuitive", but that perception of reality is not reality, so reality itself should not be expected to be intuitive.

I'm dubious that "time" is anything but a conceptual framework... our brain remembers things in order, and can imagine the future, and that gives us the impression of time. In reality the past and future do not exist, only the present.

In reality the past and future do not exist, only the present.

I don't share such a nihilistic stance, particularly because it introduces a restrictions - but it doesn't reciprocate us with any predictions. In this sense my way of thinking is strictly economical: if I don't require some assumption for anything, I don't handle it. BTW In quantum mechanics the future exists in extradimensions: the quantum wave "knows", where to emerge and the past "exists" there as well.

I'm dubious that "time" is anything but a conceptual framework... our brain remembers things in order, and can imagine the future, and that gives us the impression of time. In reality the past and future do not exist, only the present.

There's temporal information, and spatial - or sequential and simultaneous. But relativity tells us simultaneity's impossible, and cogsci tells us spatial info is dependent on temporal integration windows, where info sampled within the time constant is 'spatial' and the rest, temporal. So it's not time that's the stubbornly persistent illusion at all.. but space. Objectively, there IS only temporal information.

But relativity tells us simultaneity's impossible, and cogsci tells us spatial info is dependent on temporal integration windows

Yep - and so what? The quantum mechanics is based on deep simultaneity instead and the observable reality is a deep hyperdimensional mixture of both theories, which are heavily violated mutually just at the human observer scale. (Nearly) nothing what you may say about relativity is relevant at the quantum level and vice versa - so it cannot be generalized at all.

The minds intuitive faculties simply don't function consistently on the qm level.

Nothing functions consistently on the qm level.

This implies that the underlying reality (to qm) cannot ever be intuitively understood.

Yes unless it might be possible to understand uncertainty.

Positivism prevails over realism.

Uncertainty prevails over determinism.

Andrulis' work is controversial but no more so than much of QM.

I'd be interested in hearing more about the QM controversy.

Interesting, most of what you all are saying here is way past my comprehension threshold. Maybe not that I can't - maybe just don't want to expend energy on it. For some odd reason I am reminded of the Hitchhikers guide "Infinite probability" ship.
Anyway, our entire human existance is representative of QM. A good analogy is - your wife when she goes menopausal. Her "inconsistancies" are something you have to deal with, too. Locality of a sort...

In reality the past and future do not exist, only the present.

Memory, I believe, is part of the present. I see no problem connecting the past with current memory.

I believe memory is part of an undeveloped sense that eventual evolutionary design (and I use that term in the loosest way) will one day allow us to actually move between the different locales of each planck moment in the universe(ie - time). I beleive it is layered - sort of like an onion - each layer a planck length and a planck time segment apart. Each layer is ALWAYS there. This would also explain the increasing expansion of the universe in an elegantly simple way. I just need a super-computer to crunch the numbers...

After all, I am a gyre (actually spelled geier)... Kind of a sideways shout out to Doc Andrulis. And, BTW - we're ALL gyres...

But relativity tells us simultaneity's impossible,

I suppose that's because of the misunderstanding about gravity propagating at the speed of light. Which it does. But once propagated it moves instantaneously with a non-accelerating particle. Note most of it was propagated during inflation, when the distances between particles was very small and essentially all matter became almost instantly in gravitational communication. Non-accelerating particles carry with them their gravitational fields. So they interact instantaneously to each other's field.

Identically accelerating particles would be in almost instantaneous communication if their separation is small.

So this would add weight to my theory. If 2 particles were at one time quite close, they are "remembering" that fact and actually somehow bringing that prior closeness to THIS layer of the Planck "onion"

So this would add weight to my theory. If 2 particles were at one time quite close, they are "remembering" that fact and actually somehow bringing that prior closeness to THIS layer of the Planck "onion"

You might say they leave a lasting impression on each other. Actually all matter created during inflation would seem to do that. Like you just can't go back and unpeal the onion.

This would also explain the increasing expansion of the universe in an elegantly simple way.

Do you mean the accelerating expansion? That would be a good trick. I suspect the expansion in all directions is directly tied to the passage of time in both forward and backward directions. That's a consequence of Einstein's ideas about spacetime, but I don't think he thought of all its consequences.

..gravity propagating at the speed of light. Which it does. But once propagated it moves instantaneously with a non-accelerating particle..

???

..gravity propagating at the speed of light. Which it does. But once propagated it moves instantaneously with a non-accelerating particle..

Gravity cannot exceed the speed c, so "instantaneously" is the wrong word here. You're confusing static gravitational fields with gravitational waves. This is explained in the link below, paragraph 3 to 5.

http://en.wikiped..._gravity

..gravity propagating at the speed of light. Which it does. But once propagated it moves instantaneously with a non-accelerating particle..

Gravity cannot exceed the speed c, so "instantaneously" is the wrong word here. You're confusing static gravitational fields with gravitational waves.

Yes instantaneous is the wrong word for propagation. The propagation cannot exceed c. Once propagated, the static field moves with a non-accelerating mass. It essentially becomes part of the non-accelerating mass. If this doesn't explain the question I can design an experiment for you which illustrates the instantaneous idea for static fields (of non-accelerating masses), if you wish.

When it comes to space and time, modern physics defies our intuition in the most dramatic way.

Because space, time, and causality are a-priori conceptual intuitions of the mind. They are not observable entities themselves, but are the form in which experience must take given evolved a-priori intellectual faculties of the mind. (how the mind operates on, and organizes sense experience).

An intuitive understanding of reality implies that reality was forced to conform within this subjective conceptual structure,.. this leads to inconsistencies as reality is misrepresented in this relatively arbitrary and artificial form (from macro to qm scale). The minds intuitive faculties simply don't function consistently on the qm level. This implies that the underlying reality (to qm) cannot ever be intuitively understood. Positivism prevails over realism.

[this post was made to annoy GhostOfOtto]

Well THIS is obvious crap.

Hey nou whats with your great manifold of upraters?

Well THIS is obvious crap.

If it would be so obvious, you would give us some apparent reason for your stance already. But you didn't, which indicates, such evidence isn't so straightforward and obvious, as you're trying to pretend.

Andrulis' work is controversial but no more so than much of QM.

Like when Einstein proposed his hidden variables theory to explain uncertainty? I guess the controversy just goes on.

The fact is, we have surface water analogy for nearly all significant quantum effects, like the tunneling, orbitals, double-slit experiment or Hawking radiation - so that the ignorance of dense aether model becomes a sort of religious stance, because the connection of quantum mechanics and AWT is quite apparent. The question rather is, how many water surface analogies the deniers of AWT would still require?

I'm dubious that "time" is anything but a conceptual framework... our brain remembers things in order, and can imagine the future, and that gives us the impression of time. In reality the past and future do not exist, only the present.

There's temporal information, and spatial - or sequential and simultaneous. But relativity tells us simultaneity's impossible, and cogsci tells us spatial info is dependent on temporal integration windows, where info sampled within the time constant is 'spatial' and the rest, temporal. So it's not time that's the stubbornly persistent illusion at all.. but space. Objectively, there IS only temporal information.

Objectively, there is only information - no matter what stick you use to measure it...

Hey...did you guys know my uncle was Detlev Wulf Bronk ( MJ-12 ) and my mom worked in a virology program under him at John Hopkins University when she was pregnant with me...but I don't know who my father is ?

Do you know who Grigori ( George ) Yitshak (!saac )fallen from the House of David is ?

http://lunaticout...than-you

*bag over head*

I am becoming increasingly exhausted by all the speculations concerning not only this specific topic, but also 'time travel', because I have been involved with so many projects and suffered the inevitable psychological issues inherent in such experiments, that I am ready to throw my hands up now. I know there is no way that I can prove it one way or the other; all I can say is that we have done this over and over again successfully. So yes, it's not only possible, but quite efficient as well. But now I am finished with it as my mind can take no more of it and remain sane. That is all I have to say, and I hope that you scientists, and everyone else who is pursuing this field, will eventually experience it firsthand. Only then will you ask the next question "what is real?" Because once you experience it for yourself, that will be your first question, "how?". Then all of 'reality' becomes an even bigger question with even more unanswered questions. It's infinite I think.

Yes instantaneous is the wrong word for propagation. The propagation cannot exceed c. Once propagated, the static field moves with a non-accelerating mass. It essentially becomes part of the non-accelerating mass. If this doesn't explain the question I can design an experiment for you which illustrates the instantaneous idea for static fields (of non-accelerating masses), if you wish.

The word "Propagation" indicates a sequential chain of events, a discripter of causality - ie.; - to change state upon the occurance of a previous event. Hence "simultaneous" does not apply.

The propagation cannot exceed c.

Quantum wave doesn't propagate. It can emerge suddenly somewhere else and this emergence is instantaneous. Only group velocity cannot exceed the speed of light. It means, until the motion of quantum wave doesn't affect the center of mass location, it can undulate with superluminal speed quite easily across large area. QM postulate just maintains, the integral of the wave function across the whole area remains unitary, but there is no any constrain for speed, in which the distribution of probability density changes over this area. It means, the QM has a superluminal propagation hardwired in it - without it it couldn't maintain the integral of the probability density unitary over the larger area. The quantum wave somehow "knows", if we remove it density at one place, at some other place the same density must be added simultaneously.

http://www.youtub...D0Ka6TsY

This is just the trick of entangled pair formation, when two objects do share their common wave function. If we change the state of one object in the entangled pair, then the same state of the second member will change accordingly in the opposite way. So until pair of photons remains entangled and we switch the spin of one of this photons, then the spin of the another photons will change accordingly at the same moment - no matter, how this 2nd photons is actually distant. It's similar to the behavior of long lever in balance, which is behaving like infinitely rigid body as a whole. In relativity the state of both ends of such lever cannot change simultaneously, their changes will propagate along lever like (gravitational) wave with speed of light. In quantum mechanics such restriction doesn't apply and the change of the second end will appear simultaneously.