Explanation for Entanglement

"quantum stuff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff


This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is, so let's just call this crazy stuff
'spooky' and go eat mothers' shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right... in
actuality, there is no such thing as a localized particle. The piece of the
particle you can see in front of you is only a small subset of the entity,
which is actually a smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of
space. The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are
imaginary - but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder
when we see the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its
imaginary wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda
galaxy. We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in front
of our eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my
web page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.


Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

"Greysky" wrote in message
...

"quantum stuff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff


This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is,

No such claim is made -it is perfectly understandable - just not in everyday
terms.

so let's just call this crazy stuff 'spooky' and go eat mothers'
shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right... in actuality, there is no such
thing as a localized particle. The piece of the particle you can see in
front of you is only a small subset of the entity, which is actually a
smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of space.

Translation - it has no actual position.

The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are imaginary -
but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder when we see
the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its imaginary
wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda galaxy.

I suspect that is where you brain is .

Bill

We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in front of our
eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my web
page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.


Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

Bill Hobba wrote:

"Greysky" wrote in message
...

"quantum stuff" wrote in message
groups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff


This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is,


No such claim is made -it is perfectly understandable - just not in everyday
terms.


so let's just call this crazy stuff 'spooky' and go eat mothers'
shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right... in actuality, there is no such
thing as a localized particle. The piece of the particle you can see in
front of you is only a small subset of the entity, which is actually a
smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of space.


Translation - it has no actual position

Thank you so much for that Bill, my screen just went blank asshole

Richard Perry



The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are imaginary -
but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder when we see
the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its imaginary
wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda galaxy.


I suspect that is where you brain is .

Bill


We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in front of our
eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my web
page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.


Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

"Greysky" wrote in message...
...

"quantum stuff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff

This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is, so let's just call this crazy stuff
'spooky' and go eat mothers' shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right...
in
actuality, there is no such thing as a localized particle. The piece of
the
particle you can see in front of you is only a small subset of the entity,
which is actually a smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of
space. The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are
imaginary - but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder
when we see the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its
imaginary wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda
galaxy. We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in
front
of our eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my
web page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.

Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

I be a fish, too, Greysky! g

I remember Einstein said something like, "The
incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it's
comprehensible," oslt. And yet, he also termed the
subject in need of explanation as "spooky" (action at
a distance). He said this at a time when qt was jus' a
gigglin' babe, untested and unproven.

Then later, when entanglement had been shown to be
a reality, i believe it brought some things home to him.
I think Einstein realized that even if "space as 'ether'"
was not necessary for relativity to work, there was a
definite need for a field theory of space in order for
qt to fit together with rt.

And i also believe that he was smart enough to put it
together. But alas and alack! it was far too late. He
wasn't about to give such power to the world which
had so grossly abused his E=mc² in Japan. So he left
it to posterity, probably thinking that just *maybe*...
we just *might* be ready for it by the time somebody
else was able to finger it out and to apply it.

One plausible explanation for entanglement lies in each
and every ether theory. It doesn't matter if space is
static or dynamic, still or flowing. An explanation for
nonlocality/entanglement cannot possibly be computed
using the void-space paradigm. There absolutely *must*
be a field theory of space. Space *has* to be other than
a void, a nothingness.

If we lend substance to our concept of "space", only then
can we begin to entertain feasible explanations for such
"spooky" phenomena as entanglement. Only then can we
even approach the resolution of a TOE. And only then
will we be privy to the rudiments of the power levels that
Einstein could only dream about in his unwillingness to
share them with the world.

But thassokay, Greysky, mebbe it best to leave ****ed-
up-enough alone?

In a world that still sucks its thumb, best to keep matches
away from dry fingers. Shogun, but keep bullets in pocket.
When one goes all the way in the rain, it still better to wear
rubber overshoe.

Flow on, sweet space,
Flow to this place,
Make gravity our jail key...
For there are none who would be free.

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine http://www.savethechildren.org/
http://www.painellsworth.net

Greysky wrote:
"quantum stuff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff


This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is, so let's just call this crazy stuff
'spooky' and go eat mothers' shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right... in
actuality, there is no such thing as a localized particle. The piece of the
particle you can see in front of you is only a small subset of the entity,
which is actually a smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of
space.

*Smeared out* would be the quantum mechanist's term for
superposed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node26.html


Sue...

The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are
imaginary - but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder
when we see the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its
imaginary wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda
galaxy. We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in front
of our eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my
web page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.


Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

"Bill Hobba" wrote in message
...

"Greysky" wrote in message
...

"quantum stuff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Space is real and not illusion, isn't it. So how can you explain
entanglement. One can state there there is a signal being exchanged.
But the so called Kochen Specker theorem says that non-locality is
not true because there are no properties before measurement so
no signal is sent. But how do you explain the correleration of
the entanglement especially those with faster than light distance
effect. Do you think some kind of signal is still being exchanged
in the unmeasured state or is space really just an illusion? But space
is real, so how do you resolve this conflict. Without finding the
cause,
we won't have any theory of everything even if superstring theory
would be mastered in the future. Once we know what's causing
entanglement, then thats the time that we can get near the
TOE. So we must extend effort to understand the mechanism
for entanglement. Because the same mechanism can make
us look at the Standard Model in different ways and angles.

quantum stuff


This is the tripe most physicists would have you believe - about how
'un-understandable' the universe is,

No such claim is made -it is perfectly understandable - just not in
everyday terms.

so let's just call this crazy stuff 'spooky' and go eat mothers'
shortbread snikketts instead. Yeah right... in actuality, there is no
such thing as a localized particle. The piece of the particle you can see
in front of you is only a small subset of the entity, which is actually a
smeared out quantum wavefunction spread over all of space.

Translation - it has no actual position.

The parts we can see are real, and the parts we can't see are imaginary -
but just as effectual. Looked at in this way, it is no wonder when we see
the real part of the particle wiggle due to part of its imaginary
wavefunction interacting with another system in the andromeda galaxy.

I suspect that is where you brain is .

If you could only see half as far...

Greysky



Bill

We don't see the important parts interacting, only the part in front of
our eyes reacting seemingly for no reason. You *really* need to read my
web page - once you understand it, you too will laugh at the majority of
egotistical thinkers in this world who say we will never understand the
funny stuff.


Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.

Greysky Its space that can tell us what created the big bang. My theory
has the instant before the big bang gravity compressed space energy so
that it had a different geometry,so tiny the distances between the
sub-microscopic particles that they had to explode(critical density
theory again) I go with this size. 10-^33 centimeter.(that's the Planck
length) Best to call this spacetime before the big bang the big crunch.
I think of it as a time just before the macro realm. John Wheeler helped
my theory. Lets say my theory of the big bang fits well with the
superstring theory,so I can add Edward Witten in as well. Don't conflict
with Einstien's GR. Now that is my theory of the original universe. All
the other universes came from seeds of this. Reality is the original
was the parent universe. Black holes that reach their critical mass have
to explode,and their singularity has inherited the DNA(blue print) of
the universe its immerged in. Such is the way our universe was born.
Such is the way all the other universes were born. More universes
created than all the flakes of snow in an endless storm. They are all
exactly the same right down to their number of electrons. Their only
difference is their spacetime.of birth,and death. Nature creates them
naturally in pairs. Your's (Bert's is electron) Mine Treb is
positron. Nature used "time lapse" such as a trillionth of a second to
see matter and anti-matter had time to move in opposite directions and
that as you know Greysky is where Guth's theory kicks in. TreBert

I'm not sure that anyone has helped any of your wacko theories,
BEERTbrain! Except the frootbat, of course, but we know about him!

Oh, when was it that the bird flu was going to kill everyone? We're
waiting...

Saul Levy


On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 18:11:30 -0500, (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:

Greysky Its space that can tell us what created the big bang. My theory
has the instant before the big bang gravity compressed space energy so
that it had a different geometry,so tiny the distances between the
sub-microscopic particles that they had to explode(critical density
theory again) I go with this size. 10-^33 centimeter.(that's the Planck
length) Best to call this spacetime before the big bang the big crunch.
I think of it as a time just before the macro realm. John Wheeler helped
my theory. Lets say my theory of the big bang fits well with the
superstring theory,so I can add Edward Witten in as well. Don't conflict
with Einstien's GR. Now that is my theory of the original universe. All
the other universes came from seeds of this. Reality is the original
was the parent universe. Black holes that reach their critical mass have
to explode,and their singularity has inherited the DNA(blue print) of
the universe its immerged in. Such is the way our universe was born.
Such is the way all the other universes were born. More universes
created than all the flakes of snow in an endless storm. They are all
exactly the same right down to their number of electrons. Their only
difference is their spacetime.of birth,and death. Nature creates them
naturally in pairs. Your's (Bert's is electron) Mine Treb is
positron. Nature used "time lapse" such as a trillionth of a second to
see matter and anti-matter had time to move in opposite directions and
that as you know Greysky is where Guth's theory kicks in. TreBert