It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
...So how do you manage to go from my clear concept of a new fundamental entanglement constant ... to just another particle ?...
Originally posted by tauristercus
Originally posted by masterp
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
For me, the most probable explanation is that of quantum strings: the two particles seem to be separated, but they are actually not separated; they are the two edges of a string, and when one edge of the string is changed, the whole string has to change, including the other edge.
So if we go with your alternative, are you suggesting that the string has the ability to vary it's length depending on how far apart the 2 particles are ? Would there be a limit to how much the string could be stretched ? ... I would have thought that there would have to be a natural limit to a strings, shall we say, "elasticity" ? Please correct me if a string is infinitely stretchable.
On the other hand, replacing your "connecting string" with a fundamental "entanglement constant" that is unique to the particle pair immediately removes any such "stretching limitation" ... as a fundamental constant exists throughout the entire universe and does not need to be stretched. The value of such an "entanglement constant" would be identical no matter where you are in the universe and both particles would have equal access to their "entanglement constant" even if separated by the entire width of the universe.
Can you say that a string would be capable of being stretched from one side of the universe to the other ? I may be wrong but I would tend to doubt that a string would have such a property.
Given the choice of a "stretching string" or "entanglement constant", I'd go with the constant if for no other reason than simplicity ... choosing the simplest of 2 alternatives capable of producing the same end result is usually the way to go.
Originally posted by tgidkp
reply to post by tauristercus
so, i will point out to you the obvious problem by posing a question about your new particle. please give this plenty of thought.
how does YOUR particle know what to do?
there are certain properties of your new particle which allow it to perform its essential functions. where did these properties come from? if you invent another new particle, i am going to scream.
Ok, so there you have ... for whatever it's worth
I know that there's a heap of questions that need answering, such as how are the particle's respective quantum states converted into "information" stored within their ec, how are "unique" entanglement constants created, how are the unique entanglement constants linked to a particular pair of particles, etc, etc ... but current Quantum Mechanics is just full of such unanswered questions - but that doesn't stop us from using it !
Could Einsteins "spooky action at a distance" be explained simply as quantum state information exchange between the 2 entangled particles by way of a unique and specific entanglement constant, created at the instant of particle creation and permanently linked to them ?
Beats me ... but sure sounded good in my head !
P.S. what you have interpreted as me being denigrating was actually me extending my hand. please ignore my superiority complex and try to focus on the issues. i am not trying to put you down.
Now, if you connect the other end of the tube to the surface, you get 2 particles. Then, if you rotate the tube, both particles appear to spin, but, interestingly enough, the particles spin in different directions.