Hi Nick,


On Apr 2, 7:22 am, Nick Prince <nickmag.pri...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Yes agreed.  Also if timelike entanglements occurred there would be
> less worry about conflict with relativity than there was originally
> with spacelike effects.  However if I understand decoherence
> correctly, information from the system passes into the environment so
> it is there somehow but very dispersed.  

[SPK]
  Yes, but only rarely is the "environment" an ideal gas or monolithic
solid such that our usual ideas of diffusion and dispersal will apply.
I suspect that we need to think about how decoherence works in a
framework that takes into consideration a wide variety of rates and
that considers how the phase entanglement is distributed. I have tried
to find work examining this and only recently some papers have come
out. See: http://www.quantiki.org/wiki/Decoherence-free_subspaces and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoherence-free_subspaces
  It took a while, but Tegmark's no-go is finally loosing its hold. (I
swear that guy is the reincarnation of Lord Kelvin!)

  From what I can tell decoherence is more of an effects that
disperses among the many-worlds and not one that spreads within a
single world - like photons. We really do not have good physical
analogies for it!

>I did write a paper once(when
> I was younger and more stupid, so it has very doubtful worth) but I
> tried to formalise mathematically how memories might be stored in
> space time rather than in the brain at all ie working on the idea that
> the brain was more of an aeriel rather than a hard drive.  These
> memories could then be later picked up by a simulated entity by
> appropriate tuning. It was a stab in the dark.
>

[SPK]

 Interesting idea! It reminds me of Sheldrake's Morphic fields. I
think that James P. Hogan wrote a novel based on a similar idea also,
except in "Paths to Otherwhere" the ideas was to "tune" in on
differing parallel worlds and even travel between them.
  I think that we still do not fully understand the implications of
QM.

Onward!

Stephen
>
> On Apr 2, 1:59 am, stephenk <stephe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
snip
>
> >     The idea that the EPR effect would work across time-like as well
> > as space-like intervals makes sense in light of relativity. I am
> > surprised that more people have not looked into it! The main
> > difficulty I see is that there is a huge prejudice against the idea
> > that macroscopic systems can be entangled such that EPR type relations
> > could hold and have effects like you are considering here. Most of the
> > arguments for decoherence inevitably assume that *all* of the degrees
> > of freedom of a QM system are subject to one and the same decoherence
> > rate with its environment. What if this is not the case? What if there
> > is a stratification of sorts possible within macroscopic systems such
> > that degrees of freedom can decohere are differing rates? Correlations
> > of the EPR type would be possible within these, it seems to me...
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to