Could quantum entaglement be the key to parallel universes

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
This is just a theory I have . I have no formal education in quantum physics , but the subject fascinates me.

My theory goes like this .....
What if , at the begining of the universe as we know it , particles ( photons ) were spread over huge distances , but were somehow still " entangled " and then went on to become part of another universe . Wouldn't each universe exhibit similar characteristics ?
Now add a little Chaos and Hey Presto. We now have two universes . each will develope in a similar way because the photons that make up both universes are still entangled .
www.youtube.com...



Now here is the crunch .
If the only thing that separates the two universes is a vibratory rate , is it possible that occasionally and for a short period of time , the two vibratory rates are in sync' , allowing passage between one and the other .
To better explain .... For all you drivers out there . Have you ever been behind another vehicle and both have been indicating to make a turn . Your indicators may be blinking at different speeds , but occasionally the blink at the same time.

I would love to know your thoughts on this , but please keep it as simple as possible for me .

Please keep the subject on topic. Trolls will be ignored , but reported.

edit on 3-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Very good Walter...

If you could change the vibratory rate of a person or a thing it could move from one universe to the other universe.
edit on 3-5-2012 by Japanman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
i have been investigating this very thing, i believe there is a person who has been to an alternate earth many of them
i just have to find him he was in a thread on another forum, im going to be making a thread soon about it , it was a big 500 page mega thread that was deleted



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
this person said he has been to 36 different earths.
had no prior threads related , and when he revealed
what he knew , it was by accident . and was then
pushed by the other members to expose more, and
there is so much more to the story , but it was scrubbed
from the site and everyone there is avoiding it like the
plaque.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
i tried to give you a flag
but it will not let me.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
As soon as I saw this post I thought of that show "Fringe".



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I've been thinking about what you're saying. But what if there are an infinite number of universes? Each conscious decision we make throughout our day switches us to another universe and we experience one of the possible outcomes of that decision, while the opposite choice continues on in a separate universe. Since the number of universes are infinite, then it would be possible to experience the exact same thing in this universe, at the same time as another universe, which I think could explain the deja vu phenomenon.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by paradox
I've been thinking about what you're saying. But what if there are an infinite number of universes? Each conscious decision we make throughout our day switches us to another universe and we experience one of the possible outcomes of that decision, while the opposite choice continues on in a separate universe. Since the number of universes are infinite, then it would be possible to experience the exact same thing in this universe, at the same time as another universe, which I think could explain the deja vu phenomenon.



sounds like a good explanation for that.
timeline shift could also have something
to do with this.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeker05


sounds like a good explanation for that.
timeline shift could also have something
to do with this.


Could you elaborate on that idea?

I've heard the term timeline shift before but I've never read about it.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by truthseeker05


sounds like a good explanation for that.
timeline shift could also have something
to do with this.


Could you elaborate on that idea?

I've heard the term timeline shift before but I've never read about it.


there are many theories about the subject.
i believe a timeline shift occurs in a titor like
situation a time traveler from an alternate earth
makes a change to our earth that is more similar
to his own. causing drastic changes to our memories.
also changing natural flow of events more so than a
person would if they could time travel from their own earth
edit on 3-5-2012 by truthseeker05 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by paradox
 


I think you're right on the money. Each and every moment exists in super-position until we collapse upon the moment our free will chooses, thus resolving the parodox of free will verses static time/space where the past present and future exist in the same construct.

infinite possibilities in infinite combinations - Spock
edit on 3-5-2012 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by truthseeker05
 



Thanks very much for your imput and I look forward to your upcomming thread.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Just as an add on .
My theory would explain such things as People believing Australia was in a different position and clebrities that were thought to be dead , but are alive and of course Deja vu .



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Entanglement is not real (or at least, lacks proper physical explanation). There exists no mechanical theory of how entanglement works as an exchange of particle motions. The theory behind entanglement requires actions at a distance, non-locality etc - all strictly non-physical physics. These inferences are likely based on misunderstanding of the underlying photonic charge field emitted from all matter.

There is zero evidence of parallel universes. So you're relating a nothing to a nothing. Vibrate it all you like, it's still a nothing.

^This topic and a hundred others advertise the damage done to people's minds by the romancing of quantum realm using purely mathematical, ad-hoc theories.

Try to tune out of Standard Model doctrine for a while. Tune into what is real?

"The mood of meditation should not be: I will inwardly lie down in a warm nest, which must become warmer and warmer for me. Rather, our mood must be that we are about to dip into reality, to grasp something real. Devoted attention to little things, indeed to the least thing, is what it comes down to."



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by yampa
 


Is this just your opinion? Can you provide a source to back up your statement ?
Just because we don't understand how something works does not give us the right to say it doesn't happen , or it doesn't exist . It just means we need to expand our knowledge.

DP

edit on 3-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnprince
reply to post by yampa
 


Is this just your opinion? Can you provide a source to back up your statement ?
Just because we don't understand how something works does not give us the right to say it doesn't happen , or it doesn't exist . It just means we need to expand our knowledge.

DP

edit on 3-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)


You could do the reading yourself and pay attention to what the theory behind entanglement actually implies.

I'm not inventing objections for no reason. Entanglement used to be a controversial theory, but 80 years of politicking by the standard model evangelists have mostly eliminated this debate from the public consciousness. Now researchers are free to call any unexplained interaction between particles 'entanglement' or a result of 'quantum tunnelling' and no one even bats an eye. This despite the fact these associations blatantly require actions at a distance/ghost particle messengers and all manner of other purely mathematical interactions.

"As with Einstein, Schrödinger was dissatisfied with the concept of entanglement, because it seemed to violate the speed limit on the transmission of information implicit in the theory of relativity.[15] Einstein later famously derided entanglement as "spukhafte Fernwirkung"[16] or "spooky action at a distance"."

Quantum Mechanics is a large rotting tree, waiting to topple. Don't accept non-physical physics.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by yampa
 






Now researchers are free to call any unexplained interaction between particles 'entanglement' or a result of 'quantum tunnelling' and no one even bats an eye. This despite the fact these associations blatantly require actions at a distance/ghost particle messengers and all manner of other purely mathematical interactions.


So which is to be ? Either entanglement exists or it doesn't ?
You seem to contradict yourself .

I admit I only have a basic grasp of the subject , so my argument is limited.

DP
edit on 3-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by yampa
 





Quantum Mechanics is a large rotting tree, waiting to topple. Don't accept non-physical physics.


What are you saying, that because you can't explain the quantum weirdness with classical physics, it is all an misunderstanding?

And that we should not accept what we are seeing in quantum experiments?



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnprince
reply to post by yampa
 






Now researchers are free to call any unexplained interaction between particles 'entanglement' or a result of 'quantum tunnelling' and no one even bats an eye. This despite the fact these associations blatantly require actions at a distance/ghost particle messengers and all manner of other purely mathematical interactions.


So you admit that interaction between particles does occur ?

DP


It depends, some experiments (the ones that claimed faster than light results) were based on importing false expectations into the experimental setup. These were misunderstandings of the innate physical motions of electrons and photons.

Many of the modern entanglement experiments never bother to confirm FTL interactions, they simply take them as a given or conveniently ignore that this is what entanglement was supposed to imply. These types of experiments try to use those states as justification for quantum computation etc (that's how you get published/research money at the moment). These tend to feature complex interactions between atomic structures, which I believe will cease to be mysterious once we have a proper understanding of the structure of atoms, and how those atoms recycle and distribute their emitted charges.

Notice something like this www.nature.com...

So in this experiment - not only have they produced entangled interactions between large atomic structures of diamond, but they are also breaking the speed of light without a hitch? And yet this doesn't even warrant a mention in the article? The whole world was in a fluster about FTL neutrinos, but these entanglement researchers are so used to breaking the speed of light that they don't even bother to mention it any more? Or is there now one slower than light kind of entanglement, and one faster than light? Any idea what the physical mediator might be in either of these types of entanglement? A nothing, is the best answer the standard model has.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by yampa
 


Is mere thought not FTL ?
When you think of the process involved in a reflex action , would that not be FTL ?

DP

edit on 3-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join