According to Quantum Entanglement, 2 particles that are entangled remain in a super position even when they are at the opposite sides of the universe.
But once the particles are observed, information is relayed to each other instantaneously?
Was Einstein wrong about the Speed of Light?
how far can i push a 299792459 meter pole in .5 seconds
>>7905543
Not very far from its starting point
>>7905537
Can't transmit information or some shit like that
>>7905537
the laws of distance and speed only make coherent sense at the macro levle, quantum physics is a whole new realm of wtf.
>>7905546
if the end of the pole moved any distance at all, that would mean i influenced the end of the pole at a distance greater than the speed of light, in less than a second. its a contrived hypothetical but i think it applies
>>7905547
Yes the data seems to be random, we have yet to discover a way to control the outcome so it can't be used to send messages, we may never find a way to control the outcome since it may well be impossible.
That said random data traveling FTL is still pretty weird but that also may not be what's happening, we don't really know still but local hidden variables at least are pretty much ruled out.
>>7905537
Ask this question instead OP, if instant is possible by the means of infinite is the constants in where the instant is delegated permeable?
The point being made is as soon as you react with the entangled particle you are entangled with the particle, because math says so, and by such means is the possibility of the other particle being in proper context with what you're looking at becomes relevant to its surroundings as well, which means basically when you look at one of the particles you're sending the other one into a disco ball state with uneven mirroring; now can you make a wormhole with this? Yes.
>>7905556
No it doesn't. Mechanical forces travel through objects at the speed of sound through that object this is well proven.
The light year long pole does not work. Not even on paper
>>7905537
knowledge is not considered information, but travels faster than light.
I can be aware that there is no other me doing the exact same thing right now, without having visited the whole universe.
>its a quantum mechanics thread
>>7905572
>knowledge is not considered information
That's it I'm fucking done
>>7905547
epic cop out. We may not be able to make use of it but it's still something that is part of nature, if that is indeed what is occurring
>>7905564
yeah they do they just create a horn kind of thing where the sine wave in the middle travels to a point of making a super position of a torus where the middle reaches the the begining of the pole by the time the light gets there and the as mentioned horn assuming sub kelvin tempuratures, and at that you get a, when viewed from the side, oval where theres the horn from an elongated side to the other side and that the torus on the point, or dot, has a plane that's flat with a function of the waveformula separating one side from the other, but! There's the catch that it might create an event horizon or a zillian protons and evaporate both your object and the space that's traveled
>Because Math
Philosophy is not science
>>7905604
let simple wikipedia dumb it down for you
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy
>Philosophy is the study of humans and the world by thinking and asking questions. It is a science and an art.
>>7905587
typed that out in a bit of a fraid manner but the just of it's true, the horn ofc being without the sine wave and and when above kelvin tempuratures being with the sine wave
and the relation still remains legit af and the math on it is legit af and the inside of stars are legit af
>>7905612
you should make visualisations of your texts
>>7905623
literally waiting on my next pay check to buy a comp that can support a graphics designing system
>>7905537
>quantum entanglement
fuck off with this quantum bullshit its all made up pseudo science
if i write a and b on a piece of paper and tear it in half and put them in an envelope. i post one to one end of the universe and take the other to the other end.
i open my envelope and instantly know what's on the other piece.
no information is relayed anywhere at any speed except from the paper to my eyes and then brain.
the speed of information on the paper was the speed of me taking it to the edge of the universe.
>>7905552
Fuck no, the speed of light has to be constant, QM has nothing to do with it. By the way QM doesn't even try to deal with speed of light, that's QFT stuff.
>>7905689
Yes, but this analogy is imperfect. In your example, which half has A and which has B is decided as soon as your tear it in half and put them in the envelope. In quantum mechanics, each piece of paper has both A and B on it until we observe which it is. Not, "we don't know which one has A and which has B", but rather "it hasn't been decided which has A and which has B yet".
>>7905689
Vacate the thread you simpleton.
>>7905724
Not him, but his explanation is how I think about it.
How can you tell that it has both A and B on it if, when you inspect it, only A or B appear? Can you see that it's both until you take a closer look?
>>7905744
very good point anon thanks for having my back senpai.
>>7905744
It's called Superposition, a state in which it is both at the same time until it is observed.
>>7905754
how do you know its in both states unless you can observe it in both states?
>>7905744
Because saying "it has both" is also an imperfect description where language fails us. It doesn't really have both letters, it's just that each letter has a superposition, meaning it can be in either place, and the act of finding out which place it is in actually makes the decision of which place it is in. And it's not just that, "well, we don't know which piece of paper it's on until we look so we'll just assume it's on either until we confirm". No. The letters are literally "on both" or "have a superposition at both these spatial locations" until we collapse the wave function through observation. But this doesn't violate SR, because no exchange of information is required
>>7905763
Again, it's not literally "in both states", that's just the most comprehensible way to describe the mathematical implications of superposition. But anyway we know it's superposed because of probability wave functions, and the observed correspondence of testing results to mathematical conclusions
>>7905772
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function
Imagine particles as lines in space. Quantum entanglement refers to how these lines split, and thermodynamics says they can never come back together. So, a single electron orbiting the sun draws circular lines around it, which never perfectly converge - a spiral pattern is made in space.
A particle's future, past and present positions in space all exist simultaneously. At any moment, it's position relative to it's complete historical circuit through the universe can be defined in terms of xyz coordinates, velocity, mass, etc - all of these are valid quantum states that can be entangled.
The thing is, the particle's entire history is available during every moment of it's circuit through space, because in truth, it has no definite location - or rather, it's entire circuit through space is composed of a multifaceted line.
The line is discrete - it's not composed of a line of infinitely small sub-particles. When you tap on end A of a rod, the vibration travels at the so-called group velocity to end B of the rod. The newton laplace equation models the rod as a mass of tiny balls, and when you push such a mass it's like lining up marbles in a line and pushing them - the more force pushing them horizontally, the more force get's transfered to vertical movment because the balls have to get out of each others' way for the line to move at all.
A single, discrete marble responds instantly if you tap it - perfect rigidity. Every force that effects one part of the line effects every other part instantly.
No particle can move faster than c - but a wave isn't a particle. A wave function has an infinite group velocity, and even a negative velocity - waves reflect back into your face before you sent them.
Einstein was correct about relativity, and correct that god doesn't play dice.
>>7905775
>wave functions are solutions of the Schrödinger equation for the specific system
was my point
its the same 'problem'
>>7905724
>decided as soon as
a and b aren't decided yet if i tear with my eyes closed
>both a and b
>>7905765
>"it has both" is also an imperfect description
yes exactly. just like the paper. its just schrodinger. i don't know which paper is which so its 'both' but not really but it kind of is.
qp is not dark magic. except that whole fucking slit experiment fuck that. and the tunneling shit. and the way proteins in cells transfer energy or whatever that shit is. but apart from that...
>>7905783
Why the fuck are you here?
>>7905776
>Einstein was correct about relativity, and correct that god doesn't play dice.
Opinion discarded
>>7905789
i'm not for much longer i'm going to bed now.
why do you have a question you want to ask me?
you seem irked.
>>7905793
implying anyone would ask your half cocked ass anything
>>7905799
well there is no point in me sticking around just to be insulted by someone who isn't smart or brave enough to present or explain their own ideas or contradict what i wrote so good night, try to be a little less salty in the future its really unnecessary.
>>7905793
I have no questions for you. You try to insert yourself into scientific discussion and then say that "qp is not dark magic. except that whole fucking slit experience fuck that". I think the rest is self-explanatory
>>7905792
The notion that a particle doesn't have a definite state is absurd. On the other hand, the notion that a particle's observed state depends on your perspective of it explains why a particle can be in two places at once - assuming space itself can be red-shifted and blue-shifted, as per curved momentum space.
One single particle can be many things to many people, at many times. That doesn't mean there isn't a single set of states for a particle - it means that the perception of that set differs depending on how you look at it.
>>7905537
short answer:
no
long answer:
maybe
>>7905564
>Mechanical forces travel through objects at the speed of sound
people actually believe this?
>>7905537
the problem commences when you start using big words like "when", anon
you shouldn't do that
> pic related, the guy who put paid to the idea of universal when-ness. he is very disappointed in you right now
>>7905585
No signals, no grandfather paradox, no problem.
>>7905689
"No."
t. Bell
>>7905543
Anywhere from 0 to 149896229 meters.
>>7907748
if the terminal is influenced at all, you surpass ftl
>>7907757
if you push hard enough on one end to accelerate the other end to superluminal speeds, all you will get is a lot of bremsstrahlung from somewhere along your magical rod
>>7907724
>all those loopholes in the practical experiments
proves nothing! ha. what a load of rubbish
>mfw they only recently did one that accounted for all the problems
well fuck i guess.
>>7905564
>Mechanical forces travel through objects at the speed of sound through that object
Good thing that speed can be infinite;
>http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/90/1/10.1063/1.2423240
>Sound beyond the speed of light: Measurement of negative group velocity in an acoustic loop filter
A sound wave travels at group velocity - this means, since a wave is a perturbation in a medium, that the sound moves like a line of marbles. If you have one line and push it, it'll bunch up - if you have many lines next to each other, they can't bunch up.
This is why stiffness is associated with a high speed of sound in the newton-laplace equation.
>>7905623
what program is this?
Is this APL code?
>>7905537
My professor said what we know about quantum mechanics violates causality, and when the wave function collapses, it is instantaneous therefore faster than the speed of light.
Does this violate Einstein's postulates? Yes, and that's something you just embrace and deal with.
>>7905792
>Einstein wasn't correct about relativity and god not playing dice
Opinion discarded.
>>7907714
The problem is that "something" is still being transferred superluminally. Even if we can't use it for any practical purpose
I am a shitposter.
>>7907724
It's an analogy. Yes, amplitudes interfere, so the actual probability distribution is different from what you'd expect classically when you start talking about any system more complex than a single two-state system of two particles.
But you *still* can't gain any information into whether you're the first to measure an entangled pair simply by looking at your particle. The probability distribution is different; the practical consequences are not.
>>7910882
That's not actually a problem. Speed of light limit only applies to the transfer of energy, momentum, and/or information.
>>7911168
>the practical consequences are not.
Wrong. One can be used for device-independent quantum cryptography and the other cannot.
>>7911174
I'm not talking about any supposed violations of relativistic causation, of which, as you've pointed out, there is none. The problem, again, is that there is some mechanism in nature by which "something" is transferred non locally (depending on how you interpret Bell). This obviously has profound implications for how nature operates and further study into the matter should be conducted.
Without reading the thread, I know it's full of pop sci misconceptions. Yes, quantum entanglement does transmit information faster than light. No, this doesn't contradict relativity because quantum information has no mass.
>>7905537
lol drugs are cool xD
>>7905537
>information is relayed to each other
Wrong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem
if any poor soul came here hoping to gain an actual understanding of these issues, check out Bell's theorem. It does not question the speed of light itself. Entangled particles act as though they are one quantum object.
>>7905537
There isn't anything like quantum function collapse. Von Neumann was wrong.
Moreover, you can't sand information via such interaction - read about Bell's inequations.
>>7905537
>information is relayed to each other instantaneously
no
>buy two boxes
>Ask a friend to put either two apples or two oranges in those boxes
>Take one box and send the other box 300 000 000 meters away
>Open your box
>Find an apple
>You know there is another apple at the other box less than a second
Problem, Einstein?
>>7915192
This is not how quantum entanglement works. The collapse of the wave function is random and it has to collapse equally at both points in space, thus transmitting information faster than light.
>>7915203
What information is transmitted? None.
>>7915203
I wasn't referring to quantum entanglement.
In my theory, information is sent FTL.
>>7915212
The result of the wave function collapse.
>>7909608
looks like it, can you make sense of it?
