Do entanglement and nonlocality imply that everything is interdependent and interconnected?

[Gambit]

Nope. You have failed to demonstrate its plausibility.

What you have clearly demonstrated is that QM allows for speculations of woo. But that was a given and previously established.

Give it up.

 

[prometheus11]

What?

 

[Yerda]

I'm going to say, probably not.

 

[athena12]

I disagree.

 

[athena12]

No. You need to look at what those scientists are actually saying, not what you wish they were saying.

Are you really this insane?

 

[prometheus11]

Are you really this insane?

You're considering my sanity by degrees from one opinion I stated? Now that's crazy.

 

[athena12]

Are you attractive?

 

[athena12]

You're considering my sanity by degrees from one opinion I stated? Now that's crazy.

Are you at all attractive? Your idiocy has to be compensated.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Do entanglement and nonlocality imply that everything is interdependent and interconnected?

(Why is this religiously significant? Because spirituality can be defined as the transcendental experience of interdependence and interconnection.)

Entanglement and nonlocality only mean that quantum transactions take place outside of our four dimensions. Yeah that pretty much shows that everything is interconnected, but I don't know what that has to do with anything except to explain quantum weirdness and the EPR Paradox.

 

[prometheus11]

Entanglement and nonlocality only mean that quantum transactions take place outside of our four dimensions. Yeah that pretty much shows that everything is interconnected, but I don't know what that has to do with anything except to explain quantum weirdness and the EPR Paradox.

I'm not going to try to top that.

But perhaps time is not a dimension? Perhaps time is an effect of the universe moving from one level of complexity/density to another?
More artifact of perception.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

I'm not going to try to top that.

But perhaps time is not a dimension? Perhaps time is an effect of the universe moving from one level of complexity/density to another?
More artifact of perception.

Either time is a dimension which only exists in the universe, or is nullified/swamped by numerous/infinite multi-dimensions in the quantumworld "outside" of it. As Wheeler said to Feinman:
"I think I know why all electrons have the same mass and charge."
"Why?"
"Because they're all the same electron."

That was true thinking outside the box, and was said only semi-tongue-in-cheek. Without time, one electron could be everywhere "at once", because "once" wouldn't exist.

 

[gnostic]

Either time is a dimension which only exists in the universe, or is nullified/swamped by numerous/infinite multi-dimensions in the quantumworld "outside" of it. As Wheeler said to Feinman:
"I think I know why all electrons have the same mass and charge."
"Why?"
"Because they're all the same electron."

Electrons may have the same mass, but they won't be the same charge, if they are anti-electrons or positrons, hence positive-charged electrons.

With antimatters, all electrical charges are the exact opposites.

And the "quantumworld" you are talking about, are not from another dimension or another universe, and they are not outside of time.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Electrons may have the same mass, but they won't be the same charge, if they are anti-electrons or positrons, hence positive-charged electrons.

With antimatters, all electrical charges are the exact opposites.

Positrons aren't electrons, but even if they were interchangeable, the point is still made.

And the "quantumworld" you are talking about, are not from another dimension or another universe, and they are not outside of time.

No, our universe can best be thought of as suspended in or extracted from that quantumworld--what they're calling dark matter now. Dark matter is also the likely propulsion behind the newly discoverd acceleration in the expansion of the universe. Particles that get entangled and are non-local do so in that quantumworld until such time as they become unentangled and local again. And being outside of time (timeless) is the only way to explain entanglement, non-locality and the EPR Paradox--though it's easy to declare otherwise.

But if you have a basis for another theory, I'd like to hear it.

 

[gnostic]

Positrons aren't electrons, but even if they were interchangeable, the point is still made.

No, I will give you that. They are not interchangeable. But they do have same characteristics, they just have the opposite charges to their normal counterparts, and is that opposite charges that make them different.

But if you have a basis for another theory, I'd like to hear it.

I am not a theorist.

I see myself as an engineer more so than a scientist. Therefore, I am not an expert in relativity and quantum mechanics.

And not being an expert in those fields, I can only give you my opinions to what I am interested in reading, and what I understood that I have read.

So, having said that...

No, our universe can best be thought of as suspended in or extracted from that quantumworld--what they're calling dark matter now. Dark matter is also the likely propulsion behind the newly discoverd acceleration in the expansion of the universe. Particles that get entangled and are non-local do so in that quantumworld until such time as they become unentangled and local again. And being outside of time (timeless) is the only way to explain entanglement, non-locality and the EPR Paradox--though it's easy to declare otherwise.

...what I have read and understood about quantum entanglement don't lead to being "outside of time".

The whole "outside of time" can only be possible if we accept the very theoretical multiverse cosmologies.

To give you an example what I mean by the multiverse theories being "outside of time".

Let's say there are two universes existing in parallel, and labelled them universe A & universe B.

If this is true, than time in Universe B would have time and other dimensions that are independent of universe A. The time in A would have no effects of time in B.

And the thing is, people who lived on a planet of universe B, would not be aware of whatever time being used in planet of universe A, and vice versa.

That's how I see "outside of time" working. One universe is not dependent on the other universe.

But I don't see "outside of time" as being "timeless". Time will exist, no matter what; it just doesn't mean time don't exist.

Without time, as in being "timeless", there can be change. For timeless to be even possible, everything will be static and unchangeable.

I don't see outside of time and timeless to be the same thing as you.

And lastly, I don't it is possible to be "outside of time" if there is only one universe.

That's my opinions about "outside of time" and about "timeless".

And nothing I have read indicate that entanglement and non-locality being "outside of time" or "timeless". All that quantum entanglement indicates, is that physical properties of particles "may be" paradox to one another, not that time would be different, which is what you are suggesting.

I hoped any of the above, make sense.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

The whole "outside of time" can only be possible if we accept the very theoretical multiverse cosmologies.

There are many interpretations of quantum mechanics. We have a real good handle on what quantum theory predicts will happen, but science has been real sluggish in addressing the "why?" of things. The Copenhagen and Multiverse, the most widely accepting interpretations for decades have fallen pretty much in disfavor. For the 30 years since John Cramer formulated the Transactional Interpretation, it has been swept under the rug, because, while it addresses all of quantum weirdness, it requires transactions take place both forward and backward in time.

Now Ruth Kastner in her book, Understanding Our Unseen Reality, in motivated layman's terms, has merely re-framed that concept by saying those transactions take place "outside" of the universe in a timeless subatomic quantumland (her word). It's intuitive and makes all the difference in understanding quantum mechanics, and TI is becoming ascendant, as I understand it here on the outside of things.

But I don't see "outside of time" as being "timeless". Time will exist, no matter what; it just doesn't mean time don't exist.
Without time, as in being "timeless", there can be change. For timeless to be even possible, everything will be static and unchangeable.

I don't see outside of time and timeless to be the same thing as you.

And lastly, I don't it is possible to be "outside of time" if there is only one universe.

That's my opinions about "outside of time" and about "timeless".

And nothing I have read indicate that entanglement and non-locality being "outside of time" or "timeless". All that quantum entanglement indicates, is that physical properties of particles "may be" paradox to one another, not that time would be different, which is what you are suggesting.

I hoped any of the above, make sense.

I recommend Kastner's book, it's very up to date. As I understand it, the timeless aether in which our universe may be suspended, has to do with dark matter which is much more plentiful than visible matter/energy, and may be behind the newly found acceleration in our universe's expansion. Looks like living in interesting times isn't a curse after all.