Re: How
Re: How
yes the relativity between objects is th sizeless omni presents of nonlocality which prexisted all moving things and which its self is nonmoving.relativity therefor preexisted the big bang.relativity without objects is nonlocality .spooky action ariseing uk.ooo
-
Arising_uk
- Posts: 12259
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: How
I hate to quote Hex but you are essentially nonsense babbling here. You have not answered my questions nor addressed my points at all.jackles wrote:yes the relativity between objects is th sizeless omni presents of nonlocality which prexisted all moving things and which its self is nonmoving.relativity therefor preexisted the big bang.relativity without objects is nonlocality .spooky action ariseing uk.ooo
You OP assumes things that are not necessary to understand how or why we are conscious, or at least not until we have explored all the ramifications of being a body with a CNS and a language in an external world, Occams Razor applies here.
p.s.
You really are lazy, its unforgivable to not use a spell and grammar checker in this format.
Re: How
Two points here Einstein was wrong about spooky action at a distance not necessarily because the information transfer was faster than light, but as it turns out the information transfer when you take account of the time it takes to measure the system classically is actually always less than c. Hence no such laws were broken by entanglement, there was a big fuss recently when information transfer was said to have exceeded c in an experiment but as it turned out it was just an error of judgement/measurement error.
Basically quantum theory predicts the spins of two entangled photons will have an intrinsic angular difference that precludes them being predictable so if we describe spin as a 360 degree circle then any function must have a result that is more than a certain angle if it is to be random and less than another angle.
The sin wave is just a circle that has been split in half and is adequate to describe the probability equation which fluctuates between 1 and -1 or when the wave function is squared between 0 and 1 (renormalisation) just as all probabilities sum to 1, ie 1/6 is 1 in 6 we have 6 possible outcomes which add up to 1. The wave function is called psi denoted byt Ψ but this need not concern us.
However if the possible locations of x are infinite then the sum turns out to be meaningless. Hence renormalisation to bring the probability within logical bounds. ie it can't be everywhere at once nor can it be nowhere since it must be somewhere the probabilities within degrees of freedom for point x and momentum y must equal 1 if not then particle x which travels in 4 dimensions is utterly unpredictable and chaotic, and hence meaningless a particle could telport across the universe instantaneously with no time interval for example, but since we know it can't and that in fact c is a limit we use a maths trick to bring the degrees of freedom of time and motion within limits that make sense which just so happen to be plus or minus infinity. Note nothing is equal to infinity they are assymptotic.
So using the wave function we can make a prediction of where particle x will be at time t, but it is probabilistic not classical.
All the Dirac equation is doing is making the wave function differentiable within infinite limits if x,y,z and t=time then the complex conjugate measures the probability of x at t.
Basically quantum theory predicts the spins of two entangled photons will have an intrinsic angular difference that precludes them being predictable so if we describe spin as a 360 degree circle then any function must have a result that is more than a certain angle if it is to be random and less than another angle.
The sin wave is just a circle that has been split in half and is adequate to describe the probability equation which fluctuates between 1 and -1 or when the wave function is squared between 0 and 1 (renormalisation) just as all probabilities sum to 1, ie 1/6 is 1 in 6 we have 6 possible outcomes which add up to 1. The wave function is called psi denoted byt Ψ but this need not concern us.
However if the possible locations of x are infinite then the sum turns out to be meaningless. Hence renormalisation to bring the probability within logical bounds. ie it can't be everywhere at once nor can it be nowhere since it must be somewhere the probabilities within degrees of freedom for point x and momentum y must equal 1 if not then particle x which travels in 4 dimensions is utterly unpredictable and chaotic, and hence meaningless a particle could telport across the universe instantaneously with no time interval for example, but since we know it can't and that in fact c is a limit we use a maths trick to bring the degrees of freedom of time and motion within limits that make sense which just so happen to be plus or minus infinity. Note nothing is equal to infinity they are assymptotic.
So using the wave function we can make a prediction of where particle x will be at time t, but it is probabilistic not classical.
All the Dirac equation is doing is making the wave function differentiable within infinite limits if x,y,z and t=time then the complex conjugate measures the probability of x at t.
Last edited by Blaggard on Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: How
Probably because what you read is wrong, I wouldn't take any source at face value, if you are in any doubt though go to a physics forum and ask if non locality means that c is exceeded and they will tell you exactly the same thing, no and in fact if it had been it would of been observed in experiment, but it hasn't which is most likely because Einstein was right c is in fact the speed limit of the universe.jackles wrote:blags when i read up on nonlocality it doesnt tally with your account of it.so whats what with spooky.
AndQuantum mechanics
See also: Quantum nonlocality
Since the early 20th century, quantum mechanics has posed new challenges for the view that physical processes should obey locality. Whether quantum entanglement counts as action-at-a-distance hinges on the nature of the wave function and decoherence, issues over which there is still considerable debate among scientists and philosophers. One important line of debate originated with Einstein, who challenged the idea that quantum mechanics offers a complete description of reality, along with Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen. They proposed a thought experiment involving an entangled pair of observables with non-commuting operators (e.g. position and momentum).[4]
This thought experiment, which came to be known as the EPR paradox, hinges on the principle of locality. A common presentation of the paradox is as follows: two particles interact and fly off in opposite directions. Even when the particles are so far apart that any classical interaction would be impossible (see principle of locality), a measurement of one particle nonetheless determines the corresponding result of a measurement of the other.
After the EPR paper, several scientists such as de Broglie studied local hidden variables theories. In the 1960s John Bell derived an inequality that indicated a testable difference between the predictions of quantum mechanics and local hidden variables theories.[5] To date, all experiments testing Bell-type inequalities in situations analogous to the EPR thought experiment have results consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics, suggesting that local hidden variables theories can be ruled out. Whether or not this is interpreted as evidence for nonlocality depends on one's interpretation of quantum mechanics.[3]
Non-standard interpretations of quantum mechanics vary in their response to the EPR-type experiments. The Bohm interpretation gives an explanation based on nonlocal hidden variables for the correlations seen in entanglement. Many advocates of the many-worlds interpretation argue that it can explain these correlations in a way that does not require a violation of locality,[6] by allowing measurements to have non-unique outcomes.
Quantum teleportation is a process by which quantum information (e.g. the exact state of an atom or photon) can be transmitted (exactly, in principle) from one location to another, with the help of classical communication and previously shared quantum entanglement between the sending and receiving location. Because it depends on classical communication, which can proceed no faster than the speed of light, it cannot be used for superluminal transport or communication of classical bits. It also cannot be used to make copies of a system, as this violates the no-cloning theorem. Although the name is inspired by the teleportation commonly used in fiction, fiction far outpaces current technology: although single atoms have been teleported,[1][2][3] molecules or anything larger, such as living things, have not. One may think of teleportation as either a kind of transportation, or as a kind of communication; it provides a way of transporting a qubit from one location to another, without having to actually move a physical particle along with it.
The seminal paper first expounding the idea was published by C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres and W. K. Wootters in 1993.[4] Since then, quantum teleportation has been realized in various physical systems. Presently, the record distance for quantum teleportation is 143 km (89 mi) with photons,[5] and 21m with material systems.[6] On September 11, 2013, the "Furusawa group at the University of Tokyo has succeeded in demonstrating complete quantum teleportation of photonic quantum bits by a hybrid technique for the first time worldwide." [7]
Various articles on wiki:Quantum nonlocality is the phenomenon by which the measurements made at a microscopic level necessarily refute one or more notions (often referred to as local realism) that are regarded as intuitively true in classical mechanics. Rigorously, quantum nonlocality refers to quantum mechanical predictions of many-system measurement correlations that cannot be simulated by any local hidden variable theory. Many entangled quantum states produce such correlations when measured, as demonstrated by Bell's theorem.
Experiments have generally favoured quantum mechanics as a description of nature, over local hidden variable theories.[1][2] Any physical theory that supersedes or replaces quantum theory must make similar experimental predictions and must therefore also be nonlocal in this sense; quantum nonlocality is a property of the universe that is independent of our description of nature.
Whilst quantum nonlocality improves the efficiency of various computational tasks,[3] it does not allow for faster-than-light communication,[4] and hence is compatible with special relativity. However, it prompts many of the foundational discussions concerning quantum theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality
Re: How
Er since Einstein was inferring that spooky action at a distance was superluminal travel I think you'll find it does. This omni present bs has nothing to do with non locality which is exactly the opposite of omnipresent, so I don't think you really understand what non locality is and this error leads you to make all sorts of fundamentally erroneous assertions. non local means something is not at a location but is somewhere else basically hence if it was omnipresent it would be local.jackles wrote:yes but that doesnt take the spooky out of spooky.spooky still provides imformation that nonlocality exists in omni presents to action.
No something does not exist everywhere at once, that is apparently mystical bs or deism.
Any non local theory just says that there is a probability that electron say in the atom will be at position x at time t, since it is a probability we hence say there is an electron cloud, this does not mean if we were to release the electron ie ionise the atom, it would suddenly gain superluminal capabilities, quite the opposite in fact it's speed limit is always less than c.
A photon has a discrete quanta which can excite an electron to a higher shell for example, this quantum leap is also not super luminal. And the photon propagates at c always with a verifiable relationship of wavelength to energy and hence to frequency determined by the lorentz contractions and also the energy of the system.
Re: How
No it doesn't spooky action at a distance is information being passed at greater than c. It doesn't happen in any experiment and seemingly can not. Sigh*jackles wrote:blags i have reread articals on nonlocality.and non of them confirm what you have said about it concerning c.they only state that imformation cannot excede c. spooky action though far excedes c.
It's not material being past that Einstein was objecting to it was entanglement. Where superluminal information means when you measure the spin of one photon you "know" the spin of the other.
Since there is no way classical information could of been passed Einstein reasoned that something relatively speaking was going on that exceded c, and thus quantum mechanics was incomplete.
Bell however proved that no local real system as those Einstein favoured was able to model quantum mechanics by later using actual experiments done by Alain Aspect which showed that very point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experimentsBell test experiments or Bell's inequality experiments are designed to demonstrate the real world existence of certain theoretical consequences of the phenomenon of entanglement in quantum mechanics which could not possibly occur according to a classical picture of the world, characterised by the notion of local realism. Under local realism, correlations between outcomes of different measurements performed on separated physical systems have to satisfy certain constraints, called Bell inequalities. John Bell derived the first inequality of this kind in his paper "On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox".[1] Bell's Theorem states that the predictions of quantum mechanics cannot be reproduced by any local hidden variable theory.
The term "Bell inequality" can mean any one of a number of inequalities satisfied by local hidden variables theories; in practice, in present day experiments, most often the CHSH; earlier the CH74 inequality. All these inequalities, like the original inequality of Bell, by assuming local realism, place restrictions on the statistical results of experiments on sets of particles that have taken part in an interaction and then separated. A Bell test experiment is one designed to test whether or not the real world satisfies local realism.
Re: How
And reality in all experiments that have and will be done.
Dude no offence a denier is not a bad term except in the way you use it, someone who denies reality and all experiment because he wants so much to believe some nonsense that isn't or never could exist. No offence and I mean this sincerely nothing you have said remotely adheres to reality, so it is fiction a dream, a nonsense, babble. And good luck with that, all that disagrees with actual reality I hope serves you well. You are of course entitled to you beliefs but don't plague us with nonsense that could never happen, has no real world validation, and is useless, just keep your religion to yourself. I am not sure anyone cares that much about your utter contempt for reality and all validation in experiment, but hey you go girl...
Dude no offence a denier is not a bad term except in the way you use it, someone who denies reality and all experiment because he wants so much to believe some nonsense that isn't or never could exist. No offence and I mean this sincerely nothing you have said remotely adheres to reality, so it is fiction a dream, a nonsense, babble. And good luck with that, all that disagrees with actual reality I hope serves you well. You are of course entitled to you beliefs but don't plague us with nonsense that could never happen, has no real world validation, and is useless, just keep your religion to yourself. I am not sure anyone cares that much about your utter contempt for reality and all validation in experiment, but hey you go girl...