'Fields associated with consciousness, especially mental activity, do not appear to be bounded by space or time.'-Robert Kenny http://www.collectivewisdominitiative.org/papers/kenny_science.htm#nonlocal
On May 8, 7:31 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Entanglement is the idea that particles can be linked in such a way > that changing the quantum state of one instantaneously affects the > other, even if they are light years apart. I'm always interested in > "spooky action at a distance", or any serious blow to our conception > of how the world works. In 1964, physicist John Bell calculated a > mathematical inequality that encapsulated the maximum correlation > between the states of remote particles in experiments in which three > "reasonable" conditions hold: that experimenters have free will in > setting things up as they want; that the particle properties being > measured are real and pre-existing, not just popping up at the time of > measurement; and that no influence travels faster than the speed of > light, the cosmic speed limit. Many experiments since have shown that > quantum mechanics regularly violates Bell's inequality, yielding > levels of correlation way above those possible if his conditions hold. > That pitches us into a philosophical dilemma. Do we not have free > will, meaning something, somehow predetermines what measurements we > take? That is not anyone's first choice. Are the properties of quantum > particles not real - implying that nothing is real at all, but exists > merely as a result of our perception? That's a more popular position, > but it hardly leaves us any the wiser. Or is there really an > influence that travels faster than light? In 2008 physicist Nicolas > Gisin and his colleagues at the University of Geneva showed that, if > reality and free will hold, the speed of transfer of quantum states > between entangled photons held in two villages 18 kilometres apart was > somewhere above 10 million times the speed of light (Nature, vol 454, > p 861). > This is not the science that lets us build stuff, but I do feel some > kind of buzz about not being quite so trapped by the rather crude > inevitability of being stuck with the limitations of the speed of > light.
