On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 9:21:45 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 5/11/2019 6:58 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 6:52:36 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 5/11/2019 4:16 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 6:06:31 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5/11/2019 3:45 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 3:31:19 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote: >>>> >>>> How do AI fanboys explain telepathy and precognition ? In the case of >>>> consciousness <> AI, telepathy and precognition are more easily >>>> explainable, in the sense that consciousness being non-local, it can >>>> indeed >>>> create cases in which spatially and temporally separated consciousness can >>>> communicate. But in the case of local AIs, how can such phenomena have any >>>> chance of being explained ? >>>> >>> >>> I doubt telepathy, but I do have a low-level precognition thought >>> experiment handy: >>> >>> In the typical EPR experiment setup, particle A goes one way, and >>> particle B goes another way, to detector-A and detector-B respectively. >>> >>> Now particles A and B are "entangled" (quantum-mechanically) , so that >>> detector-B settings will stochastically influence what detector-A detects >>> (and vice versa). >>> >>> Now suppose detector-A is placed in a person's brain (not far away) in >>> such a way that particle A (via detector-A) influences a neuron or two, but >>> detector-B is light years (traveling distance) away. Can detector-B >>> settings made years in the future influence what the person's neurons do in >>> the present? >>> >>> >>> Why make it impossible to perform by placing B far away? The only >>> relevant condition is whether Bob's setting was made space-like or >>> time-like relative to Alice's. And that kind of experiment has been done. >>> There is correlation per QM. >>> >>> Brent >>> >> >> >> >> Huh? I claimed it was possible to perform. Not impossible to perform. >> >> >> You claim we can send Bob light years away to perform this experiment?? >> How? >> >> And why bother since Aspect has already done it with Bob selecting his >> setting space-like relative to Alice's? The case in which Bob's setting is >> done in Alice's future light cone has been done too, but isn't very >> interesting since Alice could then influence Bob's setting. Are you >> testing whether Alice's neurons will agree with Alice's instruments? I >> don't see what you're getting at? >> >> Brent >> > > > > > No. Bob could be someone on another planet (Bob will in the future of that > other planet). > > > Or the idea already discussed, that the B particle could go out into space > and heavy masses could bend its path around and it returns to Earth. In the > future. > > In any case, Bob is someone in the future, not the present. > > > So suppose Alice, in her lab makes a setting and measures her entangled > particle. The she walks down the hall to Bob's lab and says, "Ok, Bob you > are in the future of my setting and measurements. Go ahead and do your > thing." What difference is there between that and Bob is on another > planet? He's in Alice's future light cone. > > Brent >
*The EPR thought experiment, performed with electron–positron pairs. A source (center) sends particles toward two observers, electrons to Alice (left) and positrons to Bob (right), who can perform spin measurements.* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox#Measurements_on_an_entangled_state The A particle travels 10 feet to the A-detector (Alice). The B particle travels 2.939e+14 miles* (50 light years) to the B-detector (Bob). Bob could be on another planet. Or on Earth, if the B particle path could be bent around somehow via GR. Bob may be 30 years old. He hasn't yet been born when Alice gets the A particle. * calculation via Google But with the phenomenon of "quantum entanglement" it occurs to me that some *weak* form of both telepathy and precognition could occur: *Stabilized entanglement of massive mechanical oscillators* https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0038-x But how weak, TBD. @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/27609bee-bf6d-47ff-8245-8edbdb60fda4%40googlegroups.com.
