-----Original Message----- From: Mauro Lacy > FR: A question that I just have to ask is "could the entangled particles > remain adjacent in other dimensions while being displaced spatially?"
ML: That's a very good question. A semi-reflection on a higher dimensional plane(or volumetric cross section, btw) will be shown as a spatial displacement in the other dimensions, while the coordinates of both resultant particles on that specific dimensional axis will remain the same. Gentlemen: There is a direct connection of this phenomena with LENR, which is easy to miss. Probably because it has not reached a threshold of "meme" entanglement yet. But it is meme-related. This would be in the putative "probability field" of QM, which influences reaction rates and turns true randomness into stochastic likelihood. This can be seen most famously in a controversial techniques which Rusi Taleyarkhan used to increase the neutron yield in cavitation experiments - which involved "seeding" the reactor with a tiny secondary source of radiation which would create a few neutrons. There was no duplicity - this was planned and explicit. However, he did not mention "probability field" by name, as his underling rationale: to his detriment IMHO since the technique became a focal point of contention without a cogent rationale. His results were positive and found to be orders of magnitude greater, even after the contributing source was factored out. The strategy can be framed as this: a baseline "continuity" (even at very low level, but persistent) creates a "spatial probability field" within its "zone" which can massively alter the reaction rate of what would otherwise be extremely rare QM reactions in that zone. He got a lot of criticism for the technique (primarily from ignorant or jealous competitors for funding, and also his failure to adequately explain the rationale behind it) ... but the underlying concept is, well ... arguable if not sound, in QM. See I.E. # 1, p. 46, "Cold Fusion in a 'Ying Cell' and Probability Enhancement by Boson Stimulation," by Nelson Ying and Charles W. Shults III. (Good grief, not that Charles Schultz ;-) IOW there is a reputed "probability field" in QM in which the likelihood of a rare reaction is governed in stages of probability plateaus - by what can best be described as "the presence of the past" to use Sheldrake's terminology ... which is to say, it is influenced by "habit" or "continuity" - leading to a altered probability over randomness (once there is a threshold level of reaction) which, in effect, creates a positive feedback and leads to a drastically higher probability field at a new plateau. But my favorite Marvel-ous evidence for this - at least in the "life imitating art" category of hi-test proof (eighty at least) is most famously seen in Comics, as well it should be: http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Probability_field ... as we all appreciate from time to time, life is stranger than Fiction, often seems to imitates it - which is only because we never cease to marvel at the insight of metaphor, derived from over-generalization. Which mental process (metaphor) is, in effect, a QED-like reflection of its own positive feedback loop in the brain, if you catch my drift. Jones
