Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: If You Thought Quantum Mechanics Was Weird, You Need to Check Out Entangled Time

  1. #1
    One with Nature
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Víđálfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Daco-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Geto-Dacian & German (Moldova, Transylvania, Austrian Empire, Mecklenburg)
    Gender
    Family
    Óđins mćr
    Politics
    Völkisch
    Religion
    Heathenry
    Posts
    1,024
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    937
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,000
    Thanked in
    464 Posts

    If You Thought Quantum Mechanics Was Weird, You Need to Check Out Entangled Time

    If You Thought Quantum Mechanics Was Weird, You Need to Check Out Entangled Time

    ELISE CRULL

    6 JUL 2019


    In the summer of 1935, the physicists Albert Einstein and Erwin Schrödinger engaged in a rich, multifaceted and sometimes fretful correspondence about the implications of the new theory of quantum mechanics.

    The focus of their worry was what Schrödinger later dubbed entanglement: the inability to describe two quantum systems or particles independently, after they have interacted.

    Until his death, Einstein remained convinced that entanglement showed how quantum mechanics was incomplete. Schrödinger thought that entanglement was the defining feature of the new physics, but this didn't mean that he accepted it lightly.

    "I know of course how the hocus pocus works mathematically," he wrote to Einstein on 13 July 1935. "But I do not like such a theory."

    Schrödinger's famous cat, suspended between life and death, first appeared in these letters, a byproduct of the struggle to articulate what bothered the pair.

    The problem is that entanglement violates how the world ought to work. Information can't travel faster than the speed of light, for one.

    But in a 1935 paper, Einstein and his co-authors showed how entanglement leads to what's now called quantum nonlocality, the eerie link that appears to exist between entangled particles.

    If two quantum systems meet and then separate, even across a distance of thousands of lightyears, it becomes impossible to measure the features of one system (such as its position, momentum and polarity) without instantly steering the other into a corresponding state.

    Up to today, most experiments have tested entanglement over spatial gaps.

    The assumption is that the 'nonlocal' part of quantum nonlocality refers to the entanglement of properties across space. But what if entanglement also occurs across time? Is there such a thing as temporal nonlocality?

    The answer, as it turns out, is yes.

    Just when you thought quantum mechanics couldn't get any weirder, a team of physicists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem reported in 2013 that they had successfully entangled photons that never coexisted.

    Previous experiments involving a technique called 'entanglement swapping' had already showed quantum correlations across time, by delaying the measurement of one of the coexisting entangled particles; but Eli Megidish and his collaborators were the first to show entanglement between photons whose lifespans did not overlap at all.

    Here's how they did it.

    First, they created an entangled pair of photons, '1-2' (step I in the diagram below). Soon after, they measured the polarisation of photon 1 (a property describing the direction of light's oscillation) – thus 'killing' it (step II).
    (Provided)

    Photon 2 was sent on a wild goose chase while a new entangled pair, '3-4', was created (step III). Photon 3 was then measured along with the itinerant photon 2 in such a way that the entanglement relation was 'swapped' from the old pairs ('1-2' and '3-4') onto the new '2-3' combo (step IV).

    Some time later (step V), the polarisation of the lone survivor, photon 4, is measured, and the results are compared with those of the long-dead photon 1 (back at step II).

    The upshot? The data revealed the existence of quantum correlations between 'temporally nonlocal' photons 1 and 4. That is, entanglement can occur across two quantum systems that never coexisted.

    What on Earth can this mean? Prima facie, it seems as troubling as saying that the polarity of starlight in the far-distant past – say, greater than twice Earth's lifetime – nevertheless influenced the polarity of starlight falling through your amateur telescope this winter.

    Even more bizarrely: maybe it implies that the measurements carried out by your eye upon starlight falling through your telescope this winter somehow dictated the polarity of photons more than 9 billion years old.

    Lest this scenario strike you as too outlandish, Megidish and his colleagues can't resist speculating on possible and rather spooky interpretations of their results.

    Perhaps the measurement of photon 1's polarisation at step II somehow steers the future polarisation of 4, or the measurement of photon 4's polarisation at step V somehow rewrites the past polarisation state of photon 1.

    In both forward and backward directions, quantum correlations span the causal void between the death of one photon and the birth of the other.

    Just a spoonful of relativity helps the spookiness go down, though.

    In developing his theory of special relativity, Einstein deposed the concept of simultaneity from its Newtonian pedestal.

    As a consequence, simultaneity went from being an absolute property to being a relative one. There is no single timekeeper for the Universe; precisely when something is occurring depends on your precise location relative to what you are observing, known as your frame of reference.

    So the key to avoiding strange causal behaviour (steering the future or rewriting the past) in instances of temporal separation is to accept that calling events 'simultaneous' carries little metaphysical weight.

    It is only a frame-specific property, a choice among many alternative but equally viable ones – a matter of convention, or record-keeping.

    The lesson carries over directly to both spatial and temporal quantum nonlocality.

    Mysteries regarding entangled pairs of particles amount to disagreements about labelling, brought about by relativity.

    Einstein showed that no sequence of events can be metaphysically privileged – can be considered more real – than any other. Only by accepting this insight can one make headway on such quantum puzzles.
    The various frames of reference in the Hebrew University experiment (the lab's frame, photon 1's frame, photon 4's frame, and so on) have their own 'historians', so to speak.

    While these historians will disagree about how things went down, not one of them can claim a corner on truth. A different sequence of events unfolds within each one, according to that spatiotemporal point of view.

    Clearly, then, any attempt at assigning frame-specific properties generally, or tying general properties to one particular frame, will cause disputes among the historians.

    But here's the thing: while there might be legitimate disagreement about which properties should be assigned to which particles and when, there shouldn't be disagreement about the very existence of these properties, particles, and events.

    These findings drive yet another wedge between our beloved classical intuitions and the empirical realities of quantum mechanics.

    As was true for Schrödinger and his contemporaries, scientific progress is going to involve investigating the limitations of certain metaphysical views.

    Schrödinger's cat, half-alive and half-dead, was created to illustrate how the entanglement of systems leads to macroscopic phenomena that defy our usual understanding of the relations between objects and their properties: an organism such as a cat is either dead or alive. No middle ground there.

    Most contemporary philosophical accounts of the relationship between objects and their properties embrace entanglement solely from the perspective of spatial nonlocality.

    But there's still significant work to be done on incorporating temporal nonlocality – not only in object-property discussions, but also in debates over material composition (such as the relation between a lump of clay and the statue it forms), and part-whole relations (such as how a hand relates to a limb, or a limb to a person).

    For example, the 'puzzle' of how parts fit with an overall whole presumes clear-cut spatial boundaries among underlying components, yet spatial nonlocality cautions against this view. Temporal nonlocality further complicates this picture: how does one describe an entity whose constituent parts are not even coexistent?

    Discerning the nature of entanglement might at times be an uncomfortable project. It's not clear what substantive metaphysics might emerge from scrutiny of fascinating new research by the likes of Megidish and other physicists.

    In a letter to Einstein, Schrödinger notes wryly (and deploying an odd metaphor): "One has the feeling that it is precisely the most important statements of the new theory that can really be squeezed into these Spanish boots – but only with difficulty."

    We cannot afford to ignore spatial or temporal nonlocality in future metaphysics: whether or not the boots fit, we'll have to wear 'em.

    This article was first published in April 2018.


    Elise Crull is the assistant professor in history and philosophy of science at the City College of New York. She's co-author of the upcoming book
    "The 'Einstein Paradox': Debates on Nonlocality and Incompleteness in 1935".

    This article was originally published at Aeon and has been republished under Creative Commons.
    Source
    Die Farben duften frisch und grün... Lieblich haucht der Wind um mich.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Víđálfr For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 12:09 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Australian
    Ancestry
    Scot, Swedish, Austria
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Queensland Queensland
    Location
    Sunshine Coast
    Gender
    Family
    Grandparent
    Occupation
    artist
    Politics
    EOne Nation (Australia)
    Religion
    Germanic Heathen
    Posts
    48
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    341
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    21
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    There is an issue with using this property of time, as a Reiki Master I routinely alter the PAST and the future from the present! I use this to heal disease using what appears to be a meditation techneque. It appears that members of the Thule Society were aware of this phenonomen, hense the formation of the Vril Society and their involvment in the Andromeda Device; yes , this needs its own thread!

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hawx For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Grand Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    3 Weeks Ago @ 04:26 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,040
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,584
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,589
    Thanked in
    1,392 Posts
    Fascinating stuff!

    Despite having no real grasp of maths or physics, I developed a genuine interest in quantum theory when I was younger but time entanglement and non-locality were the things that finally finished me off

    I think when it reaches this stage you have to take a step back and ponder what all of this means. Science is no longer of any use - it becomes all about your own personal interpretation of the results (assuming them to be correct) and the implications/philosophy you draw from them.

    This article, written by a Jewess, explains things very well but all of the fawning references to Albert Einstein become a little tiresome. He's given credit for far too much, including things (such as non-locality) that he thought at the time were absurd. I've noticed over the years that even when Einstein got something wrong - which happened quite a lot! - his name is always the most prominent one and he often receives more kudos than those who actually got it right!!!

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SaxonPagan For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    One with Nature
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Víđálfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Daco-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Geto-Dacian & German (Moldova, Transylvania, Austrian Empire, Mecklenburg)
    Gender
    Family
    Óđins mćr
    Politics
    Völkisch
    Religion
    Heathenry
    Posts
    1,024
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    937
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,000
    Thanked in
    464 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Despite having no real grasp of maths or physics, I developed a genuine interest in quantum theory when I was younger but time entanglement and non-locality were the things that finally finished me off

    I think when it reaches this stage you have to take a step back and ponder what all of this means. Science is no longer of any use - it becomes all about your own personal interpretation of the results (assuming them to be correct) and the implications/philosophy you draw from them.
    A couple of years ago I saw some interesting videos from HeartMath Institute, also explaining such things... You can take a look on their website and see if you find anything interesting there... If I have the time, I will search for those videos...

    It looks like in the "heart area" we have one more brain... which helps with understanding better such kind of things... But it needs to be activated properly.


    Probably Reiki helps with that too? I didn't practice Reiki myself, but from the little I know... I think it works more with the "heart area" too, am I right or wrong?


    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    This article, written by a Jewess, explains things very well but all of the fawning references to Albert Einstein become a little tiresome. He's given credit for far too much, including things (such as non-locality) that he thought at the time were absurd. I've noticed over the years that even when Einstein got something wrong - which happened quite a lot! - his name is always the most prominent one and he often receives more kudos than those who actually got it right!!!
    That's right, I noticed it too, but I just read between the lines and avoid loosing myself into details. I guess I already have some training with doing this... It's not only about Einstein, but about other names too, in different domains...
    Die Farben duften frisch und grün... Lieblich haucht der Wind um mich.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Víđálfr For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 11:48 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,883
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,176
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,282
    Thanked in
    545 Posts
    Einstein was made the "pop star" of physics because he was a Jew (I think Astragoth had a video about how that came about some years ago, probably back on GW), and I believe, also because he was so wrong on many things.

    It's the defect of "modern physical science" that it always has to go "against resistance", "overcome resistance" or "destroy" to "harvest" (energie, pull, whatever). Victor Schauberger put it fairly simple when he swept this whole concept off the table by stating: "you are moving wrong." Ihr bewegt falsch.

    Just look at how rockets are shot into space. The "doctrine" says it must go the shortest distance to overcome earth's gravitatial power. Schauberger would laugh this off and make use of earth's rotation to get a rocket into space with a thousandst amount or less of energy wasted now. His Bloch-Wall project (having a tiny vacuum cold-fusion core) would not only produce electricity, but also gravitational power (from which other types of energy could be harvested), and the cold-fusion core, once initiated, would almost be a perpetuum mobilé type of power plant, with no dangerous waste material being produced. Of course, this all goes fundamentally against the Einsteinian doctrine of how "physics" function (ie burning fossile fuels in order to enrich the oil giants and keep the money flow going), and so we burn, destroy and waste everything.

    It's an interesting question whether von Braun knew (or understood) the Haunebu / Vril energy, but gave the US only the conventional rocket science on purpose or because he didnt really understand how Haunebu worked and therefore ignored it himself.

    Anyway, on the topic. In its very core, time and space are the same thing, so the error with quantum mechanics starts with the seperation of these things to begin with, spatial and temporal locality/nonlocality is indeed only 'seperate' from the (self-chosen, doctrine-defined, and therefore very limited) frame of the observer. This is sort of natural, because we "living" creatures experience these as two different, seperate and independent of each other things, and it causes massive headaches to ignore our lively boundaries of perception and look beyond.

    Schrödinger's example (no real cats involved) is also continually being described wrong. The text says "half-dead and half-alive", but this is wrong, because Schrödinger said it is neither dead or alive, it not only has no locality, but also no property, and, going from the doctrine of quantum mechanics, only acquires locality and property in the moment of observation. The problem with quantum measurement is that "observation" requires some kind of energy being shot at the object, it is never only truely passive reception, and so every measurement 'actively' changes the properties and thus the results, from which then theories are developed.

    There's this claim they had done a "beam", but on the physical level, it's not even close to beaming an object from one location to another. What they had done is copying the properties of a particle, storing it in a data set, and then not even "recreating" this particle at the target location, but abusing a there existing particle and imposed the properties on it. This is so far off actual "beaming" that one has to wonder why it got praise in the first place...
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Quantum Physics and Atheism
    By Alfadur in forum Agnosticism, Atheism, & Irreligion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Friday, May 4th, 2012, 04:17 PM
  2. Quantum Superposition and Orlog
    By PendaMercia in forum Germanic Heathenry
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Saturday, April 4th, 2009, 09:03 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, April 10th, 2006, 10:15 AM
  4. The weird dream to end all weird dreams!
    By Evolved in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: Thursday, December 23rd, 2004, 08:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •