ENTANGLEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS AT A DISTANCE: POSSIBLE. It Seems to be a Technological, NOT a Scientific, Problem!


 Abstract: Usual arguments against faster than light communications are flawed. Moreover, a way to make such faster than light communications using Quantum Nonlocality is surfacing…

The title will make pontiffs scream, and deride me as beyond the “fringe”. But I am writing for the future, not the past. Pontificating physicists hold that instantaneous communication at a distance are impossible. However, a closer examination shows that there is NO deep, DEMONSTRATED scientific principles at work in the denial that superluminal communications are possible.

Instead the proponents of impossibility of faster than light pretend we have demonstrated that nothing more can be said beyond the strictest interpretation of CIQ, the Copenhagen Interpretation of the Quantum (this silliness started with an erroneous demonstration of the famous mathematician Von Neuman).

Such a matter of principle position is religiously superstitious, not based on experimentally demonstrated principles… And indications are that the preparation of Quantum Jumps/States can de detected, and reversed. If that is confirmed, it is entirely plausible that superluminal communications should be achievable by entangling particles which would have been transported classically previously… far apart, creating a superluminal telegraph.

***   

Doing physics correctly, and, more generally, doing thinking most correctly, consists in establishing what are the most significant facts and how to build the mightiest causal chains. A causal chain is mightier than another if it relates more significant facts.

Faster than light communications between mythological beings were natural. However in the 17C, Dutch astronomer Roemer discovered delays in the motion of Jupiter’s satellites best explained by a finite speed of light. Fizeau confirmed the finite light speed in the lab, using fast wheels with teeth, during the 19C… while the speed of light showed up in the equations of electromagnetism, Maxwell found out, to the point he concluded that electromagnetism was light. 

French astronomer Urbain Le Verrier determined in 1859 that the elliptical orbit of Mercury precesses at a significantly different rate from that predicted by Newtonian theory… in which the speed of gravitation was infinite, a simplification Newton found “absurd” to any “philosopher” versed in the observation of nature (how could there be any other?) Einstein and his collaborators integrated Laplace’s finite gravitational speed idea, in conjunction with the theory of Relativity, to produce a modified theory of gravitation, where gravitation travels at the speed of light.

***

WANT BETTER PHYSICS? GET BETTER PHILOSOPHY!

Out of all this came a mood: no interaction can go faster than light. For weird reasons, all crows crowing the same, and mental confusion, the mentality which evolved in the herd of most physicists was that causality would be destroyed were any communication went faster than light. 

But a mood is no proof. 

Detailed considerations of the logics used by the herd found them coming short. Basically, Relativity is local, whereas communications at a distance are… at a distance, by definition (a philosophical point)… Thus, relativity does not apply, or at least, does not apply as an ABSOLUTE principle in the matter of causality: 

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2020/08/25/kill-locality-to-save-causality-and-objective-reality/

This is the Standard CIQ, the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum is seriously nuts. Here it is above. So crazy many physicists prefer to it it the thoroughly demented Many Worlds Interpretation (MIW), which says an infinity of worlds is created during each interaction. An infinity of infinites infinitely happening? Not serious!

Quantum Physics says there is such a thing as QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT. The basic reason is that Quantum Physics computes with waves. Those waves wave in various spaces, depending on the configuration of the situation (which are Hilbert spaces, and called “configuration spaces”, because they depict the configuration of the situation). What these spaces are supposed to is controversial (Schrodinger Cat Paradox): we need a theory ordering those spaces, but never mind…

After an interaction in some cases, two particles, Alice (A) and Bob (B), can be created which are “Quantum Entangled” (Schrodinger chose the word “entangled”, in English!) What “entangled” means is that the computation of what happens, probably, with these two particles, A and B, is described by a SINGLE wave.  A measurement consists of analyzing, thus destroying this common wave [1]. THUS, measuring a feature of A creates the same feature in B. The problem is that A and B can be ten light years away [2].

Popper and Einstein discovered this “EPR” situation. Ironically enough, Einstein, one of the founders of Quantum Physics, and an expert in fields, which are local, found Quantum Physics in contradiction with Locality. It is described that Einstein found that “spooky” interaction at a distance. However what Albert said in German was spukhafte Fernwirkung, which rather means “ghostly”, unreal… But in truth if the interaction at a distance didn’t happen, things as simple as angular momentum conservation would be violated. So it has to be there. And it is, experiments have confirmed.

Many self-described mainstream herd physicists insist that at-a-distance communications are impossible. However, their reasoning are faulty. First, as I said the argument that at a distance, faster than light would destroy causality is not correct, it rests on a shallow interpretation of Relativity, and a category mistake. But then those same physicists use what they view as the definitive argument that it cannot be done with present technology:

***

How To Achieve Communications At A Distance: A Technological, Not Scientific Problem:

Suppose we could make it so that a particular feature of A (say spin in the x direction) would always come out the same. Then it would be the same at B, and thus we could communicate. Mainstream physicists say: oh, but God plays with dice, and it is impossible to prepare Quantum States. How do they know this? Oh, because Homo Erectus couldn’t do it, and was a friend of “God”? God or Godot? 

However that is purely a technological question. Scientists at Yale, professor Devoret and his laboratory, have claimed they can see Quantum Jumps being prepared, and can reverse those preparations.  This hints that we may be able to select Quantum States by deliberate action. All what’s left then to do to achieve at a distance communications is to select pairs of particle A and B with such states where we could entangle them. 

Some will sneer this is just one APPLIED physics lab. Now it turns out that as a recent Nature article has it, Quantum Tunneling takes time (it takes no time in strict CIQ). There again, it smacks of inner, SUB QUANTIC machinery at work (Sub Quantum Physical Reality, SQPR pointing its entangling nose…)

***

So the impossibility of communications at a distance boils down to just one thing: the belief that God plays dice with the universe, as a matter of faith (ironically, Albert Einstein was explicitly against the notion, as he invented it, just to decry it; I say ironically as many of the disbelievers in superluminality on principle pretend to worship Einstein…).

How do those believers know that their faith is correct? Because they are on a personal basis with Dog?

Quantum entanglement experiments have been realized between an atom, say, and a photon. The Yale experimenters detected the preparation of a Quantum State Jump, and claimed they could reverse the preparation. Philosophically speaking, supposing the Yale experiments are thoroughly confirmed, as the nonlocality was, this means that the establishment of supraluminal networks is a matter of when, not if.

To go further in the philosophy of nature, this further demolishes the “It From Bit” philosophy of Wheeler and others. Wheeler was a famous physicist and Feynman PhD advisor… and also advisor of the guy who invented the Many World Interpretation…

To be more specific: what I allege above is that the state of the art of the edge of most probable science shows that superluminal communications is becoming just a technological problem (namely finding the right classically transportable materials to entangle and store).

But I am not pretending that that we will be capable of superluminally transport mass-energy. So, if what I am saying is right, a distinction would appear between pure information and mass-energy: information could go faster than light, but not mass-energy… at least for the foreseeable future (many thinkers have insisted there was no distinction between information and mass-energy, because, prior to this analysis, there was no way to transport information without transporting mass-energy).

I fear for my reputation not: Science advances, but the logic of mussels does not.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

P/S: In SQPR theory, the Quantum Interaction proceeds at finite speed. Thus, so will communications using the EPR and prepared states, as suggested above. But the speed will be much higher than light. Of course establishing such superluminal networks will be cosmically difficult.

***

[1] Analysis comes from thoroughly dissecting: from the Greek, ana “up, back, throughout” + lysis “a loosening, a cutting through”… No wonder the deepest thinkers are deeply resented for their thoroughly cutting…

***

[2] Distant particles which have interacted in the past, but not yet measured, remain connected, instantaneously sharing their physical states no matter how great the distance which separates them. This connection is known as Quantum Entanglement, and it underpins the way Quantum Physics turns locality into globality, the infinitesimally small do the grand and cosmic. .

Einstein thought Quantum Mechanics was ‘spooky’ because of the instantaneousness of the apparent remote interaction between two entangled particles, which seemed incompatible with some elements of Relativity.

Later, CERN Theoretical Physics head, Sir John Bell, formalised the Bohm variant of the EPR concept of nonlocal interaction by describing a strong form of entanglement exhibiting this spookiness. Bell entanglement is being harnessed in practical applications like quantum computing and cryptography.

Tags: , , , ,

12 Responses to “ENTANGLEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS AT A DISTANCE: POSSIBLE. It Seems to be a Technological, NOT a Scientific, Problem!”

  1. Gmax Says:

    If the greatest discoveries are made in a forest, and nobody hears about them does it matter?

    Anyway pretty impressive to this lay girl Always thought little of those who are sure they can prove negatives. Glad you set them right

    Like

  2. ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

    nature.com/articles/s41467-020-14768-1

    The above link suggests mechanical aether explanations for entanglement. A microwave and a laser beam both impinge a membrane sized just large enough to admit the microwave, and the two beams become entangled via the membrane. This works if you consider that one wavelength of any wave (microwave or laser) contains the same amount of energy. The momentum balance could create the “entanglement”, aether classically.

    Consider the slotted leaky wave longitudinal microwave antenna. In it, the phase velocity is twice the speed of light. Nobody gives a good explanation for this, other than it “violates” CP.

    Funny how a straight-up mechanical-classical elasticity modulus explains why the longitudinal component in the antenna is 2X C.

    Like

    • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

      “The above link suggests mechanical aether explanations for entanglement.” – I meant it suggested that to me. The article didn’t claim such a thing …

      Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Wow. Thanks Ronald. I had not noticed the article. Highly technical, I understood very little.
      What I had been thinking of was to entangle atom and photon, because Devoret and Al, have shown, they say, one can prepare, and reverse the atom Quantum Jump. Doesn’t mean one can select it yet, but going that way…

      Like

      • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

        Hi Patrice,

        I gave you the wrong link by accident. The Nature article describes two lasers impinged upon a membrane, where there is a separation of about 100 nanometers between the wavelength of the lasers. The other article I meant to link was really the same thing, but one beam was a laser, and the other a highly focused Bessel beam with large longitudinal component.

        It seems the “longitudinal” component is often magnified in setups that create entanglement, or work with it. It’s hard to believe Tesla wasn’t onto something with his infatuation with the longitudinal component. He was an aether believer also. I’ve been swayed a bit in his direction, along with other aether-believers.

        We as a group also subscribe to your notion that the action at a distance interaction is of a finite speed. Of course it is – within the scope of a purely mechanical view of things – and a literally direct connection, which is invisible due to 1) Planck scale, 2) longitudinal characteristic, 3) cloak of the spontaneously created waveguide in the aether, that follows the connection, and 4) the likelihood that the Planck length is not the real low limit for aether things, and photons can be smaller. Some of this sound like it’s from a science fiction writer (meh). Oh well – it’s something I wrap my head around easily.
        .

        Like

        • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

          Oops – meant to say “microwave bessel beam.”

          Like

          • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

            While I’m tossing all of this out there, may as well add:

            Some people think that the aether has very little interaction with matter. It’s interaction is mostly with energy, and implies energy-to-energy interaction. That’s kind of implicit in a photon-photon entanglement, right? One person who goes by nomer Fractal Woman (YT site) – thinks it’s a massive field of electron-positron pairs. Not sure what to think of that tho …

            – Ron

            Like

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Hi Ron, thanks for all the data. Much of it I am unaware of… I am happy that a “group also subscribes to the action at a distance is of finite speed”… Which group is this?

          Like

          • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

            Hi Patrice,

            Well – I meant to infer a “demographic” group of like minded people. It’s not really a formal group of people. The electron-positron aether theory is interesting. Here’s a link to the best video I’ve found for it:

            The video explains why the aether is so hard to detect directly. It mostly can be detected by its end-effects, but electron-positron pairs are neutral and almost without energy, so mainly “invisible”. I think that between the positron-electron pairs (if that’s really what the aether is), longitudinalness, and superluminality, we have maybe the reason for being unable to detect the aether and also unable to detect the entanglement connections of “quantum” entanglement (some aether believers substitute “aether” entanglement in this instance.

            Like

          • ronaldscheckelhoff Says:

            Perhaps you could delete the video link. I didn’t mean for it to actually display the intro page of the link. Sometimes WP is too smart for its own britches.

            Like

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: