Quantum Entanglement and "Spooky Action at a Distance"

This is something that I had not been aware of until recently. There have been several recent experiments that demonstrate the "spooky action" is real. Physics is stranger than fiction.

For non-physicists (like me), in a nutshell it works like this:
Pairs of electrons are created by various methods that are "entangled". The spin of one electron will always be the opposite of the other one by some kind of conservation of spin law. If the spin of one electron is changed, the spin of the other one will also change to preserve this conservation. The strange thing is this will still happen no matter how far apart the two entangled electrons are. Even across a galaxy. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance" and did not believe it was possible, though predicted by his mathematical equations.

The implication is there may be a way to use this phenomenon to communicate. Not only does it work over great distances, but should also work under the ocean, underground, anywhere. Also, since the effect is confined to the entangled pair of electrons, there would be no way to eavesdrop on the message, making it totally secure. You can bet the military is working on this.

The other strange thing is the interaction between the entangled pairs seems to happen instantaneously, or at least more than 10,000 times faster than light.

There are still some practical barriers to exploiting this, but it appears to be getting closer to practicality.

Here are a few articles on it.

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news...xperiment-proves-spooky-action-distance-real/

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7575/full/nature15759.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/s...t-said-to-prove-spooky-interactions.html?_r=0

Yes, this has been an idea used in sci-fi stories for a while, once it was first proposed as possible--to make interstellar communication possible, for instance. I've been interested in it since first hearing of it, years back.

Another possibility, if we could control multiple particles at once, would be to remotely control constructs of various types (possibly even organic), for situations that don't allow for other types of control.

Thanks for the articles and thread.
It's some really cool stuff, I can't hardly get enough of it because it really makes ya think. There are some excellent presentations on the tube- look for from universities or maybe tedtalks.

I kinda gave up on the idea that startrek etc would have us believe- probably for our lifetime; but there are heavy ramifications to the advancement of our understanding brewing at least. That's my wish, just the advancement of understanding. The people that make that big jump will probably throw out or rewrite much of what we consider fully valid right now, which I suppose would be ok, since much now is basically theory anyway.

An unverified tidbit to add to the subject- I believe we can observe faster-than-light particle action in plants' photosynthesis, and likely alot more natural things.

One on quantum biology I'm looking forward to checking out
[youtube]Z_KI9sjyVIQ[/youtube]

ps/ and perhaps also Dr Dean Radin would be of interest- naturallly one would also want to include consciousness to the theoretical mix eventually? Came across him this year, and liked the info/ideas

(But hasn't this confirmation with the diamonds only confirmed like one in a million?)

They left out teleporting for realzies. Yeah, 'Star Trek' like. Of course you piss off physicists if you insist on talking about it, but they'll admit it's related. (Which makes it so fun.)

Mainly it's about sending the information. Let's see, I'm 6'2", maybe we can trick it into believing I'm only 180 pounds----But no, entanglement will remind it than I"m 200, unless I get in shape again. The point is that you can get into your car and drive across the country without being somehow altered, so why not come out the other end identical to when they beamed you? The idea is that you HAVE to come out the same. Although you might have to hit the send button a million times before you make the trip. I don't know, does this mean you don't go until it knows it'll get it right.

So here's where you beam the electricity to the plane in flight. . . .

fechter said:

...it works like this:
Pairs of electrons are created... that are "entangled".

Click to expand...

There are hordes of people who don't believe the subject impinges on their lives, and so there's no need for them to look at it. Even "educated" people (liberal arts types) dismiss the subject as physics, that is, therefore something foreign and unnecessary to their field of study. But it is where knowledge hits the wall, it's the fundamental question of the universe.
Entanglement hard to explain briefly, but the paradox comes up quickly after only a bit of study. I highly respect anybody that understands entanglement (at the current level of understanding), and if someone could resolve the paradox, I would pray at their feet.
You need to understand something about spin first. This chick does the best job. [youtube]gh7xITmvgyU[/youtube]
With that, you have enough to understand what entanglement is. [youtube]5HJK5tQIT4A[/youtube]
You also should watch Veritasium on the subject. But I suspect he is just narrating without a true personal understand. (I hardly blame him.)
Allowing myself the liberty of making some loose statements, this is how it works.

You have 2 objects, which are originally together, and they are now entangled.
You have a tester that can inspect an object for a particular characteristic. The tester gives a result of either UP or the opposite, DOWN.
The objects in an un-inspected state can be separated to an arbitrarily far distance apart.
After separation, if you use your tester on one object, it will give you a result, either U or D.
Then, if you test the other object, you will find it will have the opposite result of the first.

At first, it seems like there is no paradox. When the objects were together, they separated into opposite forms, U & D. One went its marry way, and the other went the other. They were pre-determined to be one way or the other. The paradox emerges because you can prove they were not determined to be one way or the other until you tested them. This is demonstrated by Bell's Inequalities. But if you've gotten this far, you good to go on your own. The last link is only one example of the explanation. They all say the same thing. When the objects separated, neither of which knew what it was supposed to be.

Say you put two Americans women in a car, and they are undecided about politics.
You split them up into separate cars, take away their cellphones, and send each to a different cities.
At a destination city, you open the door of one car and ask the American girl if she is an Conservative or a Liberal. She answers one or the other, and the probability is 50%.
You then go to the other destination city, and ask the other girl of her political persuasion, and she answers the opposite of the first.
No matter how many times you try this experiment, the second girl always answers opposite of the first.
But they were undecided originally, and you took away their phones, so how can the second girl know how to answer opposite of the first?
But you know absolutely when you originally separated them, they were certainly undecided.

Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity are both accepted as scientific fact even though they're mutually exclusive.

Theyr'e not "mutually exclusive", they are only so far found to be applicable to different scales of size.

And that's the problem

The argument turns spooky.

[youtube]eUp_B7ZpiXk[/youtube]

1 hour ten minutes and 13 seconds in.

Link with timestamp:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUp_B7ZpiXk#t=70m11s

The most coherent explanation of quantum mechanics, though it doesn't mean it is correct, is the Many Worlds Interpretation.

[youtube]8turL6Xnf9U[/youtube]

If one electron can be two tahn we can double our 250wh/kg 18650 battery to a 500wh/kg battery !
I love quantum mechanics.

zener said:

If one electron can be two tahn we can double our 250wh/kg 18650 battery to a 500wh/kg battery !
I love quantum mechanics.

Click to expand...

I realize you are jk (that's a new abbreviation I learned ), but I'm going to respond to it anyway.
An electron is in superposition only while it is in the un-observed condition, that is, in terms of the 2-slit experiment, while in un-observed flight from the gun, through the obstacle with the slits, and to the target screen. When the electron is observed, that is, realized on the target screen, it presents itself as a particle, one particle.

Thus, when the electron is used, it is realized, and it's value is only that of one electron.

[youtube]dEaecUuEqfc[/youtube]

I just happened across this and remember watching it when trying to understand QM. Googletechtalk.


Edit// sorry AW for an unclear disagreement above, but I beg to differ. Yes, correct on scales of size, but shouldn't that be the first indicator of a problem? Interesting stuff!

not "mutually exclusive", they are only so far found to be applicable to different scales of size.

Click to expand...

[youtube]Y2UE7tp7oSw[/youtube]
thought provoking imo