| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pete" |
| Date: |
12 Mar 2005 03:46:55 PM |
| Object: |
What's with Entanglement? |
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that. They are now independent.
So when the left electron is measured to be up spin,
you'd know the right electron to be down spin by
association. What's the fuss and strange about this?
Pls. describe why. I've been reading at entanglement
web sites and can't find the answer I seek. So reply
directly and don't point me to web sites. Thanks.
Pete
.
|
|
| User: "CWatters" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 05:32:50 PM |
|
|
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
...that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 11:09:12 AM |
|
|
"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
news:C_KYd.36262$Cy6.3446915@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
..that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target
where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating
questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
Now that the N-slit experiment has been performed using slits separated in
time (not space), one could always assume the detection event, being part of
the experiment, modifies the results such that the electron / positron pair
were actually created with the correct spin orientation. In this case
information flow would be imaginary and temporally reversed.
Greysky
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guy Gordon" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 04:27:20 PM |
|
|
"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote:
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
..that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
This is over-stating the case, or adding unstated assumptions.
The experiment shows that upon measurement the pair is more highly correlated
than can be accounted for by a simple realistic model. The correlation measured
matches the prediction of QM.
It does *not* demonstrate an "instantaneous change" in one electron when the
other is measured, nor that one electron "knows which spin it's partner chose".
Both of these statements assume that there are two electrons in opposite parts
of the experiment.
Before the measurement, there are *not* two electrons, each with its own state.
There is no communication between the two, because there are not two of them.
There is only a single state -- the entangled electron pair.
Upon interaction with a macroscopic device (measurement), that state must
produce a single answer (value) of the attribute being measured. That answer
will consist of two electrons, separated in space, with opposite spins.
And that's really all you can say about it. Trying to force this to be a
"process" that takes time, or is instantaneous, or trying to force the state to
be two separate electrons that exchange some sort of information to enforce the
correlation is an attempt to force reality to match a model that is too
restrictive.
You can't push Quantum Mechanics into a simple realistic box.
It just won't fit.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bohl" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
18 Mar 2005 04:57:23 PM |
|
|
Guy Gordon wrote:
"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote:
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
..that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the
target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the
other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating
questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
This is over-stating the case, or adding unstated assumptions.
The experiment shows that upon measurement the pair is more highly
correlated
than can be accounted for by a simple realistic model. The
correlation measured
matches the prediction of QM.
It does *not* demonstrate an "instantaneous change" in one electron
when the
other is measured, nor that one electron "knows which spin it's
partner chose".
Both of these statements assume that there are two electrons in
opposite parts
of the experiment.
Before the measurement, there are *not* two electrons, each with its
own state.
There is no communication between the two, because there are not two
of them.
There is only a single state -- the entangled electron pair.
Upon interaction with a macroscopic device (measurement), that state
must
produce a single answer (value) of the attribute being measured.
That answer
will consist of two electrons, separated in space, with opposite
spins.
And that's really all you can say about it. Trying to force this to
be a
"process" that takes time, or is instantaneous, or trying to force
the state to
be two separate electrons that exchange some sort of information to
enforce the
correlation is an attempt to force reality to match a model that is
too
restrictive.
You can't push Quantum Mechanics into a simple realistic box.
It just won't fit.
Guy Gordon,
So there's really nothing to the EPR Paradox? Bell's Theorem? Alain
Aspect experiment? Meaning there is no non-locality and everything is
just misunderstood or exagerrated??
How come others here imply there is a mystery in entanglement?
Can folks elaborate. Thanks.
Bohl
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guy Gordon" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
19 Mar 2005 02:48:25 AM |
|
|
"Bohl" <aharanovbohm@yahoo.com> wrote:
So there's really nothing to the EPR Paradox? Bell's Theorem? Alain
Aspect experiment? Meaning there is no non-locality and everything is
just misunderstood or exagerrated??
How come others here imply there is a mystery in entanglement?
I never said there's nothing to it. EPR/Bell/Aspect shows that the entangled
quantum state of the particle pair is a single state, not two independent
particles moving apart. Clearly this is non-locality.
The only paradox comes from insisting that there are two independent particles.
Is there any mystery to it? Sure it's a mystery! How do we reconcile QM and
Relativity? I don't know. It's a mystery to me!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 05:40:36 PM |
|
|
CWatters wrote:
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
...that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
The entangled pair is considered a single entity.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Rudiak-Gould" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
18 Mar 2005 04:13:30 PM |
|
|
CWatters wrote:
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
No, this is not entanglement, just Bertlmann's Socks. A very common mistake,
but a mistake nonetheless. I think the prevalence of this mistake is what
has the OP confused.
-- Ben
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Boris Mohar" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 08:11:07 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:32:50 GMT, "CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be>
wrote:
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110664015.828455.277250@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that.
..that's not what happens.
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
It changes from what?
--
Boris Mohar
.
|
|
|
| User: "CWatters" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 02:39:59 AM |
|
|
"Boris Mohar" <borism_-void-_@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:58873114lm6fge98oobgh3eahaat1663u2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:32:50 GMT, "CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be>
wrote:
In brief... The spin of both is undefined until one reaches the target
where
it is "observed". When one is observed and it's spin determined the other
one _instantanly_ changes to the opposite spin. The two facinating
questions
are:
a) How does it know which spin it's partner choose?
b) How does it change so quickly?
It changes from what?
Exactly.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guy Gordon" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 04:03:09 PM |
|
|
"Pete" <whatishiggs@yahoo.com> wrote:
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that. They are now independent.
That's the key right there. They are *not* independent. They are correlated in
a very special way. If you'll read up on Bell's Inequality, you'll see the math
that shows the subtle difference between two independent electrons with opposite
spin, and two entangled electrons.
So when the left electron is measured to be up spin,
you'd know the right electron to be down spin by
association. What's the fuss and strange about this?
There is none. If the only thing you do is measure the spin straight up & down,
they are 100% anti-correlated.
The fuss comes when you vary the angle, and graph the results. You find that a
simple "realistic" picture predicts a saw-tooth graph, while Quantum Mechanics
predicts a sinusoidal graph. Experiment agrees with QM. This makes things very
hard for simple realism, and Einstein's General Relativity.
The bottom line is that you cannot explain the experimental results by assuming
that each electron leaves the source with a specific (if unknown) independent
spin state.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 05:38:54 PM |
|
|
Pete wrote:
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that. They are now independent.
So when the left electron is measured to be up spin,
you'd know the right electron to be down spin by
association. What's the fuss and strange about this?
Neither one is either until you look at one. When you do look they
instantaneously anticorrelate without regard to distance of
separation. No information may be superluminally transferred this way
(e.g., Morse code won't work for obvious reasons).
Pls. describe why. I've been reading at entanglement
web sites and can't find the answer I seek. So reply
directly and don't point me to web sites. Thanks.
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and the Bell Inequality. One
generally uses photons and linear polarization because they are so
easy to generate in bulk as entangled pairs by non-linear optical
frequency halving plus detection is easy, too.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 06:44:03 PM |
|
|
Whatever is that unseen mechanism connecting the two particles
in quantum entanglement. Our "mind" is composed or made out of it.
This is why wherever you are in the planet... Wormley, Uncle Al, etc.
we qi healers can affect the biochemistry in your body by manipulating
your energy system. Let me elaborate. We all know that you can't send
information thru entanglement like morse code. So you guys ask
how can we manipulate your body anywhere in the planet. Well.
we are manipulating directly this reality related to the unseen thing
that bind two particles together in entanglement. I said "related to
it" because this unseen mechanism has many complex nature &
characteristics. In the past. It was described as Bohm Interconnected
Implicate Order. However. In reality. It's more complex. Non-local
energy also in"forms" this non-local field. This non-local energy is
known as qi, chi, prana, etc. Now how is this connected to the atoms.
It's like asking the question what bind two particles together in
entanglement. This unseen reality is not only apparent in entanglement
but even in the entire framework of the atom. The randomness of
the wave function is due to the background ambient state of this
non-local reality. But our mind can directly manipulate the probability
clouds of the electrons because our mind is made up of this unseen
mechanism similiar to what bind two particles in entangement, noting
that the probability field also has unseen non-local field. Think
of the atom as not composing of just plain old nucleus and quantum
probability clouds but also have in addition complex Bohmian reality.
All this will comprise the new physics. It will not violate Quantum
Mechanics and Relativity but will only make them as subsets. Space
time and reality is much richer than believed by present science.
We agree there is no Aether, but there is quantum vacuum,
higgs field, etc. as well as additional such as qi non-local field and
others not yet detected by science whose instruments only detect
mainly electromagnetic and acoustic wave. The human organism,
however, has more sophisticated detection faculties, Our body is
a macrocopic quantum machine. This is why we can detect things
not yet detectable by physical instruments.
Get ready for the next revolution of science coming soon. No
amount of your denial will stop it. It will come, and humanity
will progress and grow to lofty heights.
Q-on
Uncle Al wrote:
Pete wrote:
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that. They are now independent.
So when the left electron is measured to be up spin,
you'd know the right electron to be down spin by
association. What's the fuss and strange about this?
Neither one is either until you look at one. When you do look they
instantaneously anticorrelate without regard to distance of
separation. No information may be superluminally transferred this
way
(e.g., Morse code won't work for obvious reasons).
Pls. describe why. I've been reading at entanglement
web sites and can't find the answer I seek. So reply
directly and don't point me to web sites. Thanks.
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and the Bell Inequality. One
generally uses photons and linear polarization because they are so
easy to generate in bulk as entangled pairs by non-linear optical
frequency halving plus detection is easy, too.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 07:11:38 PM |
|
|
Q-on wrote:
[snip]
we qi healers can affect the biochemistry in your body by manipulating
your energy system.
[snip crap]
Christian Scientist with appendicitis. Ha ha ha.
<http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf>
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 07:58:56 PM |
|
|
Uncle Al wrote:
Q-on wrote:
[snip]
we qi healers can affect the biochemistry in your body by
manipulating
your energy system.
[snip crap]
Christian Scientist with appendicitis. Ha ha ha.
<http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf>
--
Uncle Al
Want a demo of this non-local effect? I'll think of a safer
one. Anyway. This is what happened during quantum voodoo.
A picture or doll-life image of the person is created with
his hair sample or other material he used. This is to produce
maximum coupling effect. Then they stick pins or do things
to the picture or doll-life image. This is done in conjunction
with powerful amplification to the non-local effect by using
resonance technique (in ancient times, this is called "spells").
When this is done. The Bohmian energy system of the victims
will be damaged (hence the corresponding biochemistry because
the wave function can be controlled by this Bohmian energy).
We treat a lot of these victims by making their energy system
normal again. We can know if the patient is a victim of bad
health or quantum sorcery by tracing the ethereal cord to the
source, etc. The following are addresses of doctors using it.
http://www.pranicmds.org/usa.htm
Don't worry. We won't use the above quantum voodoo thing on you.
Have to elaborate more about the mechanism at work.
We have billions and billions of cells in our body. How do
they function efficiently. Although convensional ordering
may occur from biochemical reactions, molecular receptors,
etc. There is another mechanism at work unknown to medical
science. It is the orgnizing morphogenetic field at work.
A demo. Have sex with the same person for years. Later,
you would notice the couple would look somewhat alike. This
is because they are exchanging morphogenetic energy or qi.
If you still don't get it. An analogy. The united states have
millions of army personel. They do they function efficiently.
There is a commander in chief. He doesn't use letter to
communicate to the general and the leutenants and down
the chain. They use enhanced satellite based communication
in addition to normal ones. Similary. Our body has the enhanced
communication system too known as the human energy system or
field (or "dynamic energy density with holographic
representation"). This is to ensure the rest of the body
and the billions of cells get the message fast. Of course
the body uses molecular receptor thing too much like the
postal system of a country exist. The purpose of the energy
field is for defense of the body and overall homeostasis. In
the coming days. We qi researchers would home in on exactly
what part of the body uses this general collective communication
versus the molecular receptors thing and how they all
interrelate.
Look. Spacetime is not just curvable, strecheable, etc. It
uses holographic representation too. Subtle energy not detected
by science fills it. Qi is part of the mechanism. This
doesn't violate Quantum Mechanics or Relativity but enhance
them.
About how to demonstrate non-local effect to your body without
harming you. I'll think of it. :)
Q-on
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 04:58:06 PM |
|
|
Q-on wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
Q-on wrote:
[snip]
we qi healers can affect the biochemistry in your body by
manipulating
your energy system.
[snip crap]
Christian Scientist with appendicitis. Ha ha ha.
[snip]
A picture or doll-life image of the person is created with
his hair sample or other material he used. This is to produce
maximum coupling effect. Then they stick pins or do things
to the picture or doll-life image. This is done in conjunction
with powerful amplification to the non-local effect by using
resonance technique (in ancient times, this is called "spells").
[snip crap]
Ha ha ha.
You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
Idiot. One billion people hate BillGates to death. He doesn't suffer
so much as a sniffle.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 06:41:20 PM |
|
|
Uncle Al wrote:
Q-on wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
Q-on wrote:
[snip]
we qi healers can affect the biochemistry in your body by
manipulating
your energy system.
[snip crap]
Christian Scientist with appendicitis. Ha ha ha.
[snip]
A picture or doll-life image of the person is created with
his hair sample or other material he used. This is to produce
maximum coupling effect. Then they stick pins or do things
to the picture or doll-life image. This is done in conjunction
with powerful amplification to the non-local effect by using
resonance technique (in ancient times, this is called "spells").
[snip crap]
Ha ha ha.
You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
Idiot. One billion people hate BillGates to death. He doesn't
suffer
so much as a sniffle.
--
Uncle Al
It's simple. This "energy field" can be densified around the
body to shield from intrusions. In street term. It is called
psychic self defense. People do this subconsciously as when
defending from arguments. When a person shouts at another
person, ethereal energy are seen to hit him (this is
esoterically called thoughtforms), the thoughtforms would
linger around the energy field of the target. In time, this
can cause psychological overload or effects such as lost of
self esteem, hurt, emotional pain, etc. To release it, the
person would express it by hitting back, then the negative
thoughform or energy field component is released from the
body. You can release it too by seeing events compatible
with your thought system unfold. For example. When Bill
Gates think of his billions of dollars. It is enough to
cause the confidence to boost enough to create automatically
defensive shield in his energy field to repel from the people
who hate him. You will notice there seems to be very small
distinction between mind and energy field (or dynamic
energy density with holographic representation), this is
because the energy field is part of the mind. Yes.
Neuroscience will discover this eventually when the physics
of qi hit mainstream and the mystery of consciousness like
origins of Qualia, etc. will be solved.
About quantum voodoo. There is another factor present,
amplication of the offensive thoughtform or energy field
hurled at the person. Most often, the sorcerer summoned
entities... in technical term.. intelligent energy field
component to cause maximum damage on the victim by
penetrating his energy field by searching for weaknesses,
etc. Now the reason Bill Gates is not attacked this way
is because only few know the spells (or programmable
energy field entiity) to do the damage. Also benevolent
independent energy field entities can protect him too by
resisting the negative energy field from the offenders.
In medieval terms, this is called "spirit guides", in
modern day term, it is simply called "independent energy
field entities" or sorta.. to get an idea.. think of
dark matter producing corresponding evolution in their
respective domain and creation of dark matter beings. A
British qi researcher/theoretical physicist with Ph.D.
called Stephen Phillips hypothesis the "energy field" of
the esoteric is none other than the shadow matter of the
superstrings or dark matter but I don't agree)
With regards to this damage knowledge of qi can cause.
This is the reason I have second thought about qi physics
hitting mainstream.. because of the damage it may cause.
Without atomic model. You don't have nukes all over the
planet. Without qi physics. You don't have modern day
sorcerers all over the planet. It is important to know
the pros and cons of everything. Qi physics is safer though
because people can be taught to defend from those who
would use spells or tactical energy field thought forms
to cause damage.
Everything I said above is the basic knowledge of esoteric
science and practiced by all who know. What we qi healers
do is treat the victims, not causing damage.
The following are addresses of doctors worldwide using
the technique and they will tell you the same thing I
explained above beause of similar direct experiences in them.
http://www.pranicmds.org/usa.htm
The following are addresses of over 400 qi healing centers
worldwide who will also tell you how to build defensive
energy field just like I described.
http://www.pranichealing.org/directory/usa.htm
I'm describing from direct experience in energy field
offense and defense in my over 15 years experience and
I'm categorical of what I described. I'll think of a way
to demonstrate without damaging your energy field. I have
done this before and know the effects it can cause.
Btw.. I learned lately it is easy to demonstrate pranic
healing. Give me a patient with hives all over the body.
I can treat their say left or right arm and in 20 minutes,
the redness will go away while the arm not treated will
remain red.
Chemical reactions in the body need qi and there are certain
frequency of qi (or subtle energy from the vacuum) they use.
I'm still figuring out if it is an atomic effect or
collective effect of macro molecules behavior or both and
also how exactly the energy field is connected to the body
(or atoms). Wanna assist?
Q-on
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
13 Mar 2005 07:37:02 PM |
|
|
Q-on wrote:
Want a demo of this non-local effect? I'll think of a safer
one. Anyway. This is what happened during quantum voodoo.
A picture or doll-life image of the person is created with
his hair sample or other material he used. This is to produce
maximum coupling effect. Then they stick pins or do things
to the picture or doll-life image. This is done in conjunction
with powerful amplification to the non-local effect by using
resonance technique (in ancient times, this is called "spells").
When this is done. The Bohmian energy system of the victims
will be damaged (hence the corresponding biochemistry because
the wave function can be controlled by this Bohmian energy).
We treat a lot of these victims by making their energy system
normal again. We can know if the patient is a victim of bad
health or quantum sorcery by tracing the ethereal cord to the
source, etc. The following are addresses of doctors using it.
http://www.pranicmds.org/usa.htm
Don't worry. We won't use the above quantum voodoo thing on you.
quack quack quack.... quack quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
why don't you try some of your voodoo on me? voodoo? ha ha ha ha ha
.....
quack quack quack.... quack quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
[snip rest of unintelligible crap]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
14 Mar 2005 08:14:14 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Q-on wrote:
Want a demo of this non-local effect? I'll think of a safer
one. Anyway. This is what happened during quantum voodoo.
A picture or doll-life image of the person is created with
his hair sample or other material he used. This is to produce
maximum coupling effect. Then they stick pins or do things
to the picture or doll-life image. This is done in conjunction
with powerful amplification to the non-local effect by using
resonance technique (in ancient times, this is called "spells").
When this is done. The Bohmian energy system of the victims
will be damaged (hence the corresponding biochemistry because
the wave function can be controlled by this Bohmian energy).
We treat a lot of these victims by making their energy system
normal again. We can know if the patient is a victim of bad
health or quantum sorcery by tracing the ethereal cord to the
source, etc. The following are addresses of doctors using it.
http://www.pranicmds.org/usa.htm
Don't worry. We won't use the above quantum voodoo thing on you.
quack quack quack.... quack quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
why don't you try some of your voodoo on me? voodoo? ha ha ha ha ha
....
quack quack quack.... quack quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
[snip rest of unintelligible crap]
Non_local quantum voodoo won't kill you. It'll only
affect the biochemistry in your body (and brain) making you
unbalance and at worse making you lose your mind.
It's like this. In a nutshell. biochemistry of your body affects
your brain which affects your thinking and emotion. Now what
non-local voodoo is to affect the energy field which then affect
the biochemistry of the body. Get this??
What is energy field in a nutshell. Think of quantum
entanglement. Our body billions and billions of atoms
and particles can form some kind of macroscopic effect giving
rise to the non-local energy field. Now when we qi healers
affect your energy field. We don't use the normal atomic
particles which as Alain Aspect show can't be used to
convey information. What we used instead is the mind
which is connected to the intelligent features of the
non-local energy field. Hence we used energy field to
affect your "energy field" (defined as dynamic energy
density with holographic representation.. caused by
the billions of non-local properties of particles). Get this?
This is roughly what is qi physics... continuing where
Quantum Theory left off... in Einstein EPR thing, Bell's
Theorem, Alain Aspect thing.. and now non-local
dynamics or Qi physics.
I know this all sound very weird. But quantum theory
is really weird.
Tomorrow or the next day I'd receive my most awaited
Feynman Lectures on Physics (3 vols). After reading it.
Perhaps I can describe everything above in better
sense if you still can't understand anything I explained.
Thanks to you partly for influencing me to get
the books weeks ago.
Q-on
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
14 Mar 2005 11:21:43 PM |
|
|
then voodoo me already dammit!!! the Feynman lectures will be the best
investment you'll ever in physics. so stick to reading and
understanding those books and stop the quack quack quack.... quack
quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
15 Mar 2005 12:59:14 AM |
|
|
wrote:
then voodoo me already dammit!!! the Feynman lectures will be the
best
investment you'll ever in physics. so stick to reading and
understanding those books and stop the quack quack quack.... quack
quack quack .... quack quack quack,
Q-on's a-quackin', a-quackin, a-quackin'.
Yeah. Maybe someday I can write a book called "Q-on Lectures of
Physics" about non-local dynamics.. LOL.....
Qi is non-local energy.. qi physics carry on where quantum
theory left off (as far as non-locality is concerned). It
is this non-local characteristic of qi which explains why
Yan Xin can affect substance located thousands of miles
away as shown in the following china experiments and dozens
more.
http://www.accessv.com/~yuan/yansci/time/2002_YanXin_Qigong_JSE.pdf
In the coming years. More aspect of this non-local energy will
be known as researches about qi are on going in many parts of
the planet.
The year 2012 will the start of qi physics hitting mainstream
and humanity will have a new beginning... mark that year.
Q-on
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
15 Mar 2005 02:40:20 AM |
|
|
Q-on wrote:
Physics" about non-local dynamics.. LOL.....
[snip crap about imaginary object called qi]
away as shown in the following china experiments and dozens
more.
then yan Xin is nothing but a fraud. i don't believe he can do any of
that. it's all crap and lies. why don't you ask Yan Xin to take the
Randi challenge? because Yan Xin is scared ***** he will fail and be
exposed as a fraud, like all those others, and i believe you are also a
fraud Q-on.
http://www.accessv.com/~yuan/yansci/time/2002_YanXin_Qigong_JSE.pdf
what for, stop posting the URL's of cheats and frauds.
[snip more crap about qi]
The year 2012 will the start of qi physics hitting mainstream
and humanity will have a new beginning... mark that year.
bwa haha hahahahahahahahahahahahahah, i can't stop laughing Q-on. is
this your voodoo at work? bwa
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah,
Q-on you quack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Q-on" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
15 Mar 2005 07:21:12 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Q-on wrote:
Physics" about non-local dynamics.. LOL.....
Aren't you tired of qi? I'm tired of the word "qi". After
I read Feynman stuff. I'll come back and use the words
"Subquantum non-local energy patterns" instead of qi
or invent a new term more modern than these. Let the
battle continue next time. Suffice to say that our current
physics deal with local dynamics. While the new physics
will deal with non-local dynamics. It is important to know
how it is coupled to the electromagnetic force. Some
researcher such as Tiller suggest there is a richer side to
electromagnetism. Well if you put a prism in the path of light
beam. You will get the normal rainbow spectrum with
refractive index more than unity (1). However, seers
can also detect subtle spectrum less than unity that is
bent opposite to that of the newtonian spectrum. I want
to undersand what it is. Some suggest it is energy that
is contained or located in time hence time energy being
very powerful of the non-mass energies, because it is
the most compressed. We still don't know exactly what
it is. This is why qi physics is not just study of non-local
dynamics but also how it relates to the electromagnetic
force. Hence quantum electrodynamics (QED) is a
prerequisite to study qi physics or non-local dynamics.
I admit I'm not good in QED so I'd start from Feynman
who is one of the originator of QED.
Fight with you some other time dude. Have to master
Feynman stuff first because QED will become subset of
qi physics eventually.
Cya.
Q-on
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 04:54:55 PM |
|
|
Pete wrote:
There is something I don't understand quite well.
Hope someone can clarify this.
In entanglement experiment, a common source emits
2 electrons which are said to be entangled.
Supposed the left electron moving towards the target
has up spin and the right down spin. What is so
remarkable about that. They are now independent.
So when the left electron is measured to be up spin,
you'd know the right electron to be down spin by
association. What's the fuss and strange about this?
Pls. describe why. I've been reading at entanglement
web sites and can't find the answer I seek. So reply
directly and don't point me to web sites. Thanks.
Read this--you won't regret it...
Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics
Amir D Aczel
2002 John Wiley & Sons/Four Walls Eight
Windows 302pp 16.99/$28.00hb
There are two kinds of books about quantum
mechanics. There are those in which we learn
about abstract concepts such as Hilbert spaces,
state vectors and density matrixes, but where the
author never addresses - or only pays lip-service
to - the question of what quantum mechanics
actually means. This is the approach often taken in
textbooks. The other, quite opposite, approach
focuses on the interpretative question - drawing all
kinds of conclusions and analogies, talking about
telepathy and other mysteries, and perhaps even
claiming that quantum mechanics transcends
Western philosophy.
Neither approach is very helpful when one wants
to understand what quantum mechanics really
means in a deep philosophical sense. Amir Aczel's
new book on entanglement - falling as it does into
neither category - avoids such pitfalls.
Anton Zeilinger from the Institute of Experimental
Physics at the University of Vienna reviews the
book in the May issue of Physics World; email
anton.zeilin...@univie.ac.at
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What's with Entanglement? |
12 Mar 2005 04:49:49 PM |
|
|
The explanation takes a bit of imagination; the tendency to think
classically when thinking about this sort of thing is very strong.
Let's specify the thought experiment in a little more detail so we can
talk clearly about what is going on.
Assume we have a neutral, spin-0 particle at rest. This particle then
decays into an electron and positron. Let us further assume that we
apply an electric field so we know which direction the electron and
positron are going so we can detect their spins without worrying about
which direction they went.
The question is: What is the direction of the electron's spin after
this event? And what is that of the positron?
If we ask QM for a general answer, QM says that before we make the
measurement, the spin of both particles is completely indeterminate.
Nature itself does not know which particle has which spin. The only
thing that is certain is that the two particles have opposite spin
(that's what entangled means: even if the spin of either particle is
not known, the relationship between the spins is known), but what the
spin of either one actually is, is unknowable.
According to QM, when we make a measurement on a particle, we force the
universe to pick a state for the particle to actually be in. Thus when
we measure the Z-component of the spin of the electron, we force the
entangled particles to choose a particular state---either electron
spin-up, positron spin-down or electron spin-down, positron spin-up.
At any time before the measurement, both choices were equally likely.
The tricky part of the whole problem is: Given QM's assumption that
the universe *does not know* which spin the electron will actually have
before it is measured, how does the positron know to pick the opposite
spin when it is measured? The electron and positron could be separated
by several light-years, but if the electron is measured spin-up, the
positron will be measured spin-down every time. There seems to be some
sort of information flowing between the electron and positron to make
sure they are always synchronized. The difficulty is that according to
special relativity, no information can travel faster than the speed of
light. So how does the positron know?
The obvious solution, and the one you are proposing, is that QM is
wrong in its assumption that the universe does not know which particle
had which spin. You are saying that the universe really knows, but we
can't find out until we make the measurements. This is perfectly
reasonable on the face of it. Albert Einstein proposed the same thing.
But it turns out that this idea is actually testable, and appears to
be wrong. This is because there are other experiments we can perform
on the entangled pairs. For instance, we can measure the Z-component
of the electron's spin but measure the positron's spin in a completely
different direction. I'm not sure how much QM background you have, so
here I'll just summarize what has come to be known as Bell's
inequality.
Bell's inequality (which has been checked many times, and is easy to
derive once you've grasped the idea) basically says that for the
experiment in the previous paragraph, any model whatsoever which claims
that the particles "really" had a given spin before the measurements
were made will predict results different from the ones predicted by
standard QM. There are have been several experiments made to compare
the two theories, and standard QM has been strongly supported by the
results.
So we are faced with the question: How does the positron know what the
electron's spin is? How does it know the electron has been measured
and what the result was? I've never seen a really satisfactory answer.
That is part of the fascination of working with entangled pairs.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
