[In a pair of entangled particles, if one particle is observed to have a specific spin, for example, the other particle observed at the same time will have the opposite spin. ]
That is a definite form of communication, 1/0. All you would have to do is 'modulate' the spin of one particle, then detect that opposite spin in the other particle. That opens up whole new possibilities in encrypted communications that is not possible to break........
The problem is modifying the spin of one entangle particle breaks the entanglement (decoheres the system).
The only thing you can do is observe the one, then observe the other. The collapse of the wave-function under observation preserves the anti-correlation of spins (in the usual example of an entangled pair) so the two observers read opposite spins (up-down or down-up), a prior agreement as to how to interpret them (1st observer takes up to be 1, down to be 0, while the 2nd takes down to be 1 and up to be 0) gives them a common bit. Doing this repeatedly gives them a common random bit string which can be used as a one-time binary pad. That’s all it seems you can do with this, whether it’s implemented by Planck-scale wormholes or by real physics not being “physically realistic” (a notion that means looking like classical physics in certain ways).
“That is a definite form of communication, 1/0. All you would have to do is ‘modulate’ the spin of one particle, then detect that opposite spin in the other particle.”
Here’s what you are missing. A particle is not a light bulb, you cannot just look at it and see if the spin is 1 or 0. Observing a particle changes its state, due to the observer effect. So if your communication depends on determining exactly what state a particle is in, but you cannot observe that particle and then be sure what state it was in before you observed it, you have a useless communication system. Without transmitting additional bits of information through traditional means, this problem cannot be overcome.