I meant Particles interact with other particles SIMULTANEOUSLY over, in theory, indefinite distances, as in non-local/Belles Theorem/EPR Experiment (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen)
This is, strictly speaking in terms of QM itself, not true. All particle interactions occur at spacetime points. They are "events" in relativistic terms.
Nonlocality is an interpretive description of the implications of the theory itself, and in my opinion, it is not aptly made. The requirement of nonlocality is on a presumed "hidden" reality consisting of discreet classical objects required to mimic, or reproduce, QM behavior, but such particles are in no way part of QM, and again IMO, represent the tenacious hold that classical Newtonian reality retains on our thinking.
posted on 05/29/2012 8:00:02 PM PDT
This is, strictly speaking in terms of QM itself, not true. All particle interactions occur at space-time points. They are "events" in relativistic terms.
In one of the two major QM interpretations there apparently is some form of 'signal' that reaches a particle's counterpart changing its properties--instantaneously, provided the two were once 'entangled' quantum mechanically.
posted on 05/29/2012 9:56:46 PM PDT
(ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
Have you considered that your ‘spacetime points’ may in fact be divisible into space points and temporal points, such that a pair of quantum mechanically entangled ‘things’ may be entangled temporally but not spatially? Or, they may be entangled spatially but not temporally? The fifth chapter of Daniels book in the OT seems to point to the spatially but not temporally entangled possibility, and Jesus’s Physics lesson to Philip in John chapter 14 seems to indicate things may be entangled temporally but not spatially.
posted on 05/30/2012 7:57:42 AM PDT
(Being deceived can be cured.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson