Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Quantum entanglement

Quantum entanglement
January 02, 2012, 08:31:10 AM
In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.


Forgive the hippie source; I love the spaced out hippies, earthgrainers, weirdos and alternative lifestyles people because they take it all so seriously, while everyone else seems to make a show of being serious while inventing reasons to ignore the obvious.

Entanglement violates the idea that linear space/time causality exists. Two particles, not connected, reflect each others' states. This suggests the monistic doctrine that an order exists "prior" to the physical state, and that it determines the mathematical distribution of values in that physical state.

In other words, the type of thinking behind astrology, religion, numerology and occultism may be real. By "religion" I mean Hinduism of course.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 02, 2012, 09:19:24 AM
"Quantum theory is now being fruitfully combined with theories of information and computation. These developments may lead to an explanation of processes still not understood within conventional science such as telepathy, an area where Britain is at the forefront of research."

This is a quote by scientist Brian Josephson.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 02, 2012, 12:40:47 PM
The author of the page to which the OP links made the fundamental mistake of EXTRAPOLATING.  Sure, a "hologram" idea might make for a good model of reality in the light of some discoveries, but how the hell do you get from "physical reality is intangible and illusory" to "WE CAN ALTER THE WORLD WITH OUR MINDS, DUDES"?

The "self" is as much an illusion as is the rest of this reality.  "We" are a part of the hologram.  You can't stop yourself from being ill by wishing upon a star.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 02, 2012, 03:13:47 PM
The content is from the book the Holographic Universe, the book already starts from the assumption that this is real (supposedly the author experienced it his whole life, including poltergeist with materializations) and is using that model to explain it, not the other way around as you mentioned.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 06, 2012, 01:57:57 AM
All of this reality is illusory talk seems to betray the principle of contradiction to me.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 06, 2012, 09:32:43 AM
As always the problem is in the way people use words and interpret things. I also agree that saying reality is an illusion is problematic. But I find the holographic model quite convincing. When they say reality they probably mean the usual things we pick up with our senses. Even so, I do not consider it illusion, and believe people say it like that on purpose to shake the established view and bring new interpretations on our view of the world. And also saying that reality is holographic is not the same as saying it's false, for me.

But if you think about it, you can say that no illusion exists: What is an illusion but a reality that has been interpreted in a wrong way? If something really did not exist... It could not even be talked about. If I see a pink bunny flying, it exists: The interpretation that it is really there might be wrong. So might our interpretation of the world of the senses.

But this is a very dangerous idea...

Some interesting examples of how we might be wrong regarding the obvious: When I was a child I thought all my teachers were wrong in saying that numbers were endless. If it is endless, how did they create all the numbers? They would have to be creating them until now, and forever. Only after some years I realized there was no need to do this, the numbers are already endless, you just add another zero and you can do that forever.

Another example, but I don't really know if this is true. When I was achild I saw on TV that time was relative and that it literally passed faster in some circunstamces, like when we're havin fun. I found it outrageous. Time cannot move faster, any idiot can check the clock and see for themselves. Now I don't really know, but I don't have the same views on this subject as I did when I was a kid.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 06, 2012, 09:47:20 AM

In 1998, you published your now famous second novel, The Elementary Particles, about the tragic love lives of a brilliant scientist and his sexually frustrated half-brother. What led you to write it?


The real inspiration was the experiments of Alain Aspect in 1982. They demonstrated the EPR paradox: that when particles interact, their destinies become linked. When you act on one, the effect spreads instantly to the other, even if they are great distances apart. That really struck me, to think that if two things are connected once, they will be forever. It marks a fundamental philosophical shift. Ever since the disappearance of religious belief, the current reigning philosophy has been materialism, which says we are alone and reduces humanity to biology. Man as calculable as billiard balls and completely perishable. That worldview is undermined by the EPR paradox. So the novel was inspired by this idea of what could be the next metaphysical mutation. It has to be less depressing than materialism. Which, let’s face it, is pretty depressing.


I vomit on all false idols, including denial of the world beyond the material.

I piss in the mouth of all false authority, including that of the undifferentiated mob.

Re: Quantum entanglement
January 09, 2012, 07:23:40 PM
I am not entirely learned on Hindu beliefs or reincarnation in general for that matter. I am curious, does this discovery shed any light on the validity of this belief? At first glance it seems to confirm Brahmin.