I believe our understanding of info transfer needs to change. The data is not traveling anywhere because it appears to exist simultaneously here & there and when one changes the other does without delay. There has to be another dimension of energy / ether we need to discover that would make this make sense. Like looking into a fish pond but the fish don't see surface, only your hand dipping in water as a miraculous occurrence.
jamescampbell.us 7032039877 > On Aug 4, 2016, at 5:58 PM, jim bell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From: juan <[email protected]> > On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 16:49:12 +0000 (UTC) > jim bell <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Apparently, that is true. The tantalizing thing is that SOMETHING > >> APPEARS (information, of some nature) to be transferred between one > >> particle and another, distant one, and yet there seems to be no way > >> to use that transfer to actually transmit useful FTL > > > Which sounds rather absurd no? > > Certainly that sounds absurd! It IS absurd! Which explains a lot of the > fascination > has for entangled photons and related phenomena. Einstein never liked the > quantum-mechanics idea, famously declaring "God does not play dice with the > universe". Unfortunately for Einstein, dice are actually played. > > In fact, Einstein's EPR Paradox (Einstein, Podolski, Rosen) was invented by > Einstein himself in an attempt to prove that quantum mechanics could not > be a complete statement of the problem. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox > > This principle said that IF quantum mechanics > were a complete statement of the problem, then something seemingly > impossible [fill in the blank with FTL information travel] would occur. > Einstein was > quite convinced that nothing (including no information) could travel faster > than > 'c'. Amazingly, it appears that nature ("God", for the religious among you) > has acted > simultaneously to protect the quantum mechanics theory, but ALSO to protect > Einstein's belief that nothing could travel faster than 'c'. If anybody > should discover > a method to use entangled photons to effectively transmit data FTL (and thus, > presumably at infinite speed) that person would surely deserve a Nobel Prize > in > Physics. > > > >Either this is ordinary EM > > phenomena that propagate at the so called speed of light, or > > it is something else which could propagate at 'faster than > > light' speed. > > It's at least 10,000 times 'c' the speed of light in a vacuum, according to > experiments involving fiber optics. It might be essentially infinite. > > > If 'something' is moving at faster than light speed, then some > > information must be being transmitted. If no information is > > being transmitted, then by definition, there's no way to measure > > speed and the claim makes no sense. > > Well, that's the problem. Knowing that SOMETHING is being transmitted, and > actually > USING that method to transmit useful information, are (quite strangely) two > different > things. That, also is the amazing implications of entangled photons. > > Jim Bell
