Explanations for quantum entanglement "spooky action at a distance"

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#1
Redefining time
The real flow of time is the irreversible collapse of the wave-function, until the collapse takes place time has not truly moved forward and thus what seems to be spooky action at a distance will be observed.

To you it seems like time is moving forward smoothly but thats not actually what's happening fundamentally. Time only really moves forward when quantum free will is exercised (true quantum randomness). If something is already determined it already exist and then there is no real passage of time.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#2
Space-time curvature solution
Spacetime can be urved in a way that allow for what seem to be instantaneous communication such as "Einstein-rosen bridge"

https://www.scienceandnonduality.com/article/quantum-entanglement-and-wormholes

It is however impossible to communicate faster than light via quantum entanglement since you dont get any real information until you compare the results, thus special relativity isn't violated and why then invoke wormholes?
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#3
Superdeterminism
By having global hidden variables it may be possible to get something like quantum mechanics without any true indeterminsm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism

This would however result in there not being any true passage of time since the future would already be determined,tthis is a very good reason to be very sceptical about any deterministic unified theory/approach.

Thus we can conclude that the project Stephen Wolfram is doing now will end in failure:


https://www.wired.com/story/stephen-wolfram-invites-you-to-solve-physics/

There are of course plenty of red flags regarding his project, it's very unlikely that he will actually be able to get the physics we can observe and thus it will probably be relegated to being a mathematical curiousity like so many previous failed unification attempts, the Kaluza-Klein model also looked promising initially but turned out to be "unphysical" (not real).
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#4
A measurement doesn't always collapse the wavefunction
One common false claim is that a measurement will cause the wavefunction to collapse, this is true when the measurement is on a large scale (anything allowing humans to observe it) but it does not hold true for measurements at sufficiently small scale

https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys2682

This is not an issue in the case of the penrose interpretation since if the wavefunction is collapsed due to gravity then you would need it to be at a large scale, so large that we cannot actually test for it with our current technology.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#5
The quantum eraser experiment
The quantum eraser experiment can be explained with ordinary quantum entanglement.

1615628286231.png


https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.03920

We see a hint at that when reading the original paper

1615625577835.png
1615625630279.png

https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9903047.pdf

1615625665473.png


We see here that R03 = R01 + R02 meaning whether or not you actually measure which path the particle took doesn't retroactively affect the actual outcome on the screen. The interference patterns you see on R01 and R02 are from BS due the fact that we can get information regarding which slit the particle mostly took from where it landed.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2010.00049.pdf
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#6
About "wave-particle duality"
As far as we know the wavefunction might actually be a real thing that is described accurately by the dirac equation meaning it will never actually behave exactly like a classical particle, it is just that in some situation it will behave very similar to a classical particle.

The only exception is the collapse of the wavefunction but then it still doesn't behave like a classical particle.

The fact that the wavefunction is complex does not mean it's not real, there is nothing wrong with complex numbers


Of course this does not mean the wavefunction is fundamentally real, nobody knows the actual nature of reality, it's just that there is no reason to conclude the wavefunction isn't real.
 
Top