'Spooky action' builds a wormhole between 'entangled' quantum particles

Dec 03, 2013 by Vince Stricherz
This illustration demonstrates a wormhole connecting two black holes. Credit: Alan Stonebraker/American Physical Society

Quantum entanglement, a perplexing phenomenon of quantum mechanics that Albert Einstein once referred to as "spooky action at a distance," could be even spookier than Einstein perceived.

Physicists at the University of Washington and Stony Brook University in New York believe the phenomenon might be intrinsically linked with wormholes, hypothetical features of space-time that in popular science fiction can provide a much-faster-than-light shortcut from one part of the universe to another.

But here's the catch: One couldn't actually travel, or even communicate, through these wormholes, said Andreas Karch, a UW physics professor.

Quantum entanglement occurs when a pair or a group of interact in ways that dictate that each particle's behavior is relative to the behavior of the others. In a pair of entangled particles, if one particle is observed to have a specific spin, for example, the other particle observed at the same time will have the opposite spin.

The "spooky" part is that, as research has confirmed, the relationship holds true no matter how far apart the particles are – across the room or across several galaxies. If the behavior of one particle changes, the behavior of both changes simultaneously, no matter how far away they are.

Recent research indicated that the characteristics of a wormhole are the same as if two black holes were entangled, then pulled apart. Even if the black holes were on opposite sides of the universe, the wormhole would connect them.

Black holes, which can be as small as a single atom or many times larger than the sun, exist throughout the universe, but their gravitational pull is so strong that not even light can escape from them.

If two were entangled, Karch said, a person outside the opening of one would not be able to see or communicate with someone just outside the opening of the other.

"The way you can communicate with each other is if you jump into your black hole, then the other person must jump into his black hole, and the interior world would be the same," he said.

The work demonstrates an equivalence between , which deals with physical phenomena at very tiny scales, and classical geometry – "two different mathematical machineries to go after the same physical process," Karch said. The result is a tool scientists can use to develop broader understanding of entangled quantum systems.

"We've just followed well-established rules people have known for 15 years and asked ourselves, 'What is the consequence of ?'"

Explore further: Spooky action put to order: Physicists classify different types of 'entanglement'

More information: Karch is a co-author of a paper describing the research, published in November in Physical Review Letters.

Holographic Dual of an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Pair has a Wormhole, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 211602 (2013) prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v111/i21/e211602

Related Stories

Researchers explore quantum entanglement

Feb 08, 2013

Albert Einstein called quantum entanglement—two particles in different locations, even on other sides of the universe, influencing each other—"spooky action at a distance."

Recommended for you

Could 'Jedi Putter' be the force golfers need?

Apr 18, 2014

Putting is arguably the most important skill in golf; in fact, it's been described as a game within a game. Now a team of Rice engineering students has devised a training putter that offers golfers audio, ...

User comments : 58

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Tangent2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 03, 2013
"One couldn't actually travel, or even communicate, through these wormholes, said Andreas Karch, a UW physics professor."

Directly, perhaps not. But communication through the wormhole is exactly what is happening with entangled particles. How else would they be communicating their spin state with each other? And suppose I had one entangled particle and someone had the other at the other end of the universe, we could communicate with the spin states acting as a morse code type of language. Hence, communication through the wormhole.
Whydening Gyre
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 03, 2013
How fast can you change the spin state of a black hole...?
Aaron1980
2.3 / 5 (22) Dec 03, 2013
someday we will figure out that we can travel through the wormholes.
JIMBO
3.5 / 5 (11) Dec 03, 2013
As usual, Physorg writers scour the arxiv, looking for something sexy, shoot first & then WE ask questions later. Suppressed in the above article is Any mention of string theory or SUSY, yet it appears thruout the arxiv preprint. It goes without saying that after 3 yrs of searching at LHC, there is Zero evidence for SUSY or strings. Likewise for any empirical basis of `wormhole entanglement'.
scottfos
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 03, 2013
It goes without saying that after 3 yrs of searching at LHC, there is Zero evidence for SUSY or strings.


what did finding Higgs suggest, out of curiosity?
megmaltese
2 / 5 (24) Dec 03, 2013
May the idiot single starring all comments die in deep pain.
I will 5 star all of them, stupid retarded loser.
Maelstrom Devnal
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 03, 2013
Tangent2 got a point
pauljpease
3.1 / 5 (9) Dec 03, 2013
"One couldn't actually travel, or even communicate, through these wormholes, said Andreas Karch, a UW physics professor."

Directly, perhaps not. But communication through the wormhole is exactly what is happening with entangled particles. How else would they be communicating their spin state with each other? And suppose I had one entangled particle and someone had the other at the other end of the universe, we could communicate with the spin states acting as a morse code type of language. Hence, communication through the wormhole.


But the system you propose does not communicate any information. So what if you and someone else each have one of a pair of entangled particles? I've seen numerous articles showing that this will not allow you to transmit any information you don't already have.
cantdrive85
1.2 / 5 (21) Dec 03, 2013
Pseudo-scientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo.
Maelstrom Devnal
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 03, 2013
Tangent2 got a point


You again? Come on Skippy why are you hiding?


?
lrshultis
1.6 / 5 (9) Dec 03, 2013
Just how is the energy, to flip the other entangled particle, transmitted since energy can not travel faster than c? Why isn't there a conservation of spin where the particles are entangled in objective reality with opposite spins to begin with? It is time to stop trying to reify mathematics. Mathematics only use in physics is to describe reality and does not exist as something in reality.
theon
1.5 / 5 (15) Dec 03, 2013
"If two black holes were entangled, Karch said,..."

Well, well, are we going to put two macroscopic systems in an entangled state? Persisting in the old misconception that the wavefunction is more than a tool to make statistical statements? Overlooking that a few of degrees of freedom can be controlled and put in a pure state? Stretching results from a quantum theory with induced gravity to the real world with real gravity? Modesty has rarely been a virtue of stringers, I am still recovering from the Theory of Everything (that is, everything except our Universe).
Mimath224
1.8 / 5 (15) Dec 03, 2013
As usual, Physorg writers scour the arxiv, looking for something sexy, shoot first & then WE ask questions later. Suppressed in the above article is Any mention of string theory or SUSY...

Yes, and in addition some theories on micro BH also require extra physical dimensions because of theoretical increase in gravity. 2 things make me wonder; a) the s/child radius of a planck mass object is about 2x planck length..b) and if that were possible would this not be a basis for the unification of QM & GR?
MikeBowler
1.5 / 5 (13) Dec 03, 2013
But the system you propose does not communicate any information. So what if you and someone else each have one of a pair of entangled particles? I've seen numerous articles showing that this will not allow you to transmit any information you don't already have.

you don't really explain how information can not be transmitted, if each person were able to control the spin state of his atom then by it affecting the other atom you could send information in binary form, or morse code, or any system which relies on 2 states or values only.. so for example lets say we're those people with the atoms, and i was witness to something interesting that happened on the street, i could send details of that story using binary ascii
VendicarE
2.6 / 5 (7) Dec 03, 2013
"Just how is the energy, to flip the other entangled particle, transmitted " - Irs

What makes you think that energy is needed to flip the spin state of a particle?

You have assumed.

Protoplasmix
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 03, 2013
Good ideas, interesting analogy considering the scales.

@NaySayers:
It's taking successful tools from one discipline and applying them to another. It's theoretical, mathematical, analytical, and logical. It's exactly what creative and innovative minds do. Best of all, it's communicated to other minds. It resonates with the open and free thinking minds because it's a productive way to resolve the natural cognitive dissonance that arises from experiencing the known and the unknown. That this example of sound methodology, and nothing more, should itself be a source of cognitive dissonance for some minds highlights the importance of both neuroplasticity and beneficial environmental stimuli.
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (12) Dec 03, 2013
Don't we even have know where the 2 entangled black holes or whatever ARE, to know if they are entangled or not? Or is it ANY and ALL of the whatever that is entangled?
Very confusing...
Egleton
1 / 5 (11) Dec 03, 2013
If there were higher dimensions, a la string theory, then the distance between two points would increase would it not?
Two points on a piece of paper are not bought together by measuring through the third dimension, so I assume the same principle applies with higher dimensions.
But the reverse would also be true.
If particles are two dimensional objects then the distance between them would decrease.
And how about if they were single dimension objects- point like particles. Then they would be even closer together.
Is there any way of quantifying this idea? Can the distance become zero, but appear great to a higher dimensional observer such as us?
VendicarE
3.2 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2013
"Pseudo-scientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo." - Can't Drive, Too stupid

Ah, the Critique from planet ConservaTard.

Thanks, but don't you think that you should go back and graduate from public school before you start critiquing Quantum Mechanics?

Zera
1 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2013
Wouldn't standing within any proximity of an event horizon 'cause a whole bunch of relative temporal distortions? How do we know information is not travelling back and forth at what would be a relative "instantaneous" velocity?
c0y0te
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 04, 2013
"If the behavior of one particle changes, the behavior of both entangled particles changes simultaneously,"

Hm,... no.
QM just says that if we do a measurement of one entangled particle (the result of which is going to be random but with some probability) then the measurement of the other one will be correlated, and Bell's theorem says that there is no _local_ hidden variable theory that can reproduce all predictions of QM. In short, in Copenhagen interpretation of QM, what changes, and how, is not known.

IMO:
Spooky action at a distance?!?
Bohm/de Broglie QM interpretation FTW!
pepe2907
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 04, 2013
Well, as I see it, there are two possible relative states between the two entangled particles and the wormhole. Either the wormhole serves as the communication channel between the two particles, what means communication goes through it, ergo it's possible in general, or communication through the wormhole is impossible, in which case obviously the particles don't communicate their state through it and the whole idea about having a wormhole messed in the system of entangled particles is a nonsense, pure speculation at best.
Anyway, there's something that bothers me even more - it's the infinite elasticity of that wormhole if it exists, because if it's not infinitely elastic /and it also seems - with zero energy for it's initiation/ the wormhole would change the inertial behavior of the system - /short and imperfect/ if one of the particles is pushed by a force for a finite period of time after that the wormhole should slow it's movement violating the first Newton's law...
NeutronicallyRepulsive
1 / 5 (10) Dec 04, 2013
I think the best explanation is this. You take two boots left and right. You put them in two boxes. You're not allowed to open or see which one is which. You flew with them to two points billion light years apart. You have 50% chance of boot in your box being left, and 50% right. By opening the box you now know 100% and also you know that billions of light years away they have right boot. Spooky action at a distance. The only difference is, that the reality is inherently - in its core - this trade off between measurement and knowing. In this particular interpretation of QM the measurement = entanglement.
MikeBowler
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
I think the best explanation is this. You take two boots left and right. You put them in two boxes. You're not allowed to open or see which one is which. You flew with them to two points billion light years apart. You have 50% chance of boot in your box being left, and 50% right. By opening the box you now know 100% and also you know that billions of light years away they have right boot
. -- sorry had to trim some

is this your explanation as to why communication between 2 entangled particles is not possible?

btw, to others who downvoted me without replying well done on disproving what looks like a pretty solid concept if you don't understand one aspect of entanglement

to both the quoted guy and everyone, i have seen numerous science articles mention that controlling cetain properties is possible and that in doing so the other is measured to have the opposite
Mimath224
2.6 / 5 (15) Dec 04, 2013
I think the best explanation is this. You take two boots left and right. You put them in two boxes. You're not allowed to open or see which one is which. You flew with them to two points billion light years apart. You have 50% chance of boot in your box being left, and 50% right. By opening the box you now know 100% and also you know that billions of light years away they have right boot. Spooky action at a distance. The only difference is, that the reality is inherently - in its core - this trade off between measurement and knowing. In this particular interpretation of QM the measurement = entanglement.

Mmm, not quite. What you have done is applied a 'common sense' value to the boots and in another way something like 'hidden variable'. That is one boot is NOT the same as the other, one is 'left' & the other is 'right' and not identical at the start. The actual 'measurement' doesn't affect anything that was there at the beginning. That means 'superposition' does not apply.cont.
Mimath224
2.6 / 5 (15) Dec 04, 2013
cont
To put it another way you are applying the 'local realism' of classical mechanics to QM
taka
1 / 5 (10) Dec 04, 2013
Faster than light communication is not needed, wormhole is shortcut by definition. Shortest distnce between entangled particles is always zero.

Extra dimensions are not needed. The wormhole happens not throw extra dimension but outside dimensions. Space/time is secondary phenomena created by particle interactions. Particle itself is outside space but his shadow looks as particle-wave there. And therefore it can instantly (faster the light) collapse applying all his energy into single point in space, even when his wave was covering large volume initially. Any detector asking is the particle here is requiring all his energy and therefore causes total collapse (that was wrong question, it was not there initially, only part of it was). But you can measure the wave intensity more gently and that do not collapse it.

And therefore faster then light communication using entangled particles may be possible.
Ens
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2013
At first glance it's a spooky looking smiley face.
what_the_hell
1.7 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2013
What if all black holes are already entangled, and the universe is more like swiss cheese than tapioca pudding...
MikeBowler
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
cont
To put it another way you are applying the 'local realism' of classical mechanics to QM

ah see this is where you have hit a crucial point, this article says
The work demonstrates an equivalence between quantum mechanics, which deals with physical phenomena at very tiny scales, and classical geometry – "two different mathematical machineries to go after the same physical process," Karch said. The result is a tool scientists can use to develop broader understanding of entangled quantum systems.
classical geometry ties into classical physics/mechanics alla Relativity
Noumenon
2.1 / 5 (15) Dec 04, 2013
This idea seems more geared toward satisfying a-priori intuitive predilections than adding anything of substance to further predictive understanding. The old aether theory offered the same comfort, but was entirely superfluous and redundant.

How many such macroscopic-scale conceptual artifacts of thought, must be shown to fail on the microscopic scale for physicists to learn the lesson offered by the Copenhagen interpretation and the conceptual revolution that QM forced upon physics?,.... local realism, counterfactuality, separability, causality, failure of absolute simultaneity, objective realism,.... Speculating about worm holes or multiverses is borderline metaphysics.
NeutronicallyRepulsive
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2013
That was an explanation by comparison. It doesn't have to be 1:1. It explains how finding out about a property of one thing, can affect same property of another thing far away instantly, but without transferring any classical information. This one is used quite widely. This is not my explanation unfortunately.

I'm always amused, when people think that it's your own idea, they rip it apart only to find out later it was coined by Brian Greene for example. As in this case. It's good, because only patronizing asses will go that one extra step, and in turn humiliate themselves because of their character.

I'm ready to hear your excuses and rationalizations now, but I will ignore them.
Noumenon
2.1 / 5 (14) Dec 04, 2013
That was an explanation by comparison. It doesn't have to be 1:1. It explains how finding out about a property of one thing, can affect same property of another thing


If there is no empirical justification for invoking 'worm holes' except to erect the façade of an "explanation" then it is bogus physics. If it is a matter that a duel mathematical space is easier to work in than the original, and that the "worm holes" in question are only meant as a mathematical construct then ok.

Physics at the qm scale is not about "explanations", it is about observational experience, so it important to set a-priori intuitions aside. The one above invokes a path through space-time, superfluous as the aether, imo,.... but I've been wrong before. Just giving my opinion, not trying to be an ass.
Infinum
1 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
It is like this:
1) every particle is a black hole
2) spooky action at a distance is a consequence of:
2a) opposite states during entanglement and
2b) synchronization of internal rotary motion (time) of entangled particles
Noumenon
1.9 / 5 (13) Dec 04, 2013
That was an explanation by comparison. It doesn't have to be 1:1. It explains how finding out about a property of one thing, can affect same property of another thing far away instantly, but without transferring any classical information. This one is used quite widely. This is not my explanation unfortunately.


I thought you were responding to me in my above post above, sorry.

As to your boot analogy, Mimath224 and MikeBowler are just trying to point out that it does not capture the essential nature of entanglement. It has the same defect as the split coin analogy.

There is no intuitive 'classical' analogy that really works. The two entangled particles are one object until a measurement, irrespective of the distance between them.
MikeBowler
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
if you look at Relativity and QM from a mathematical standpoint then the 2 seem almost entirely different, but if you face facts and realise that Relativity and QM describe the same universe at different scales, then you have to conclude that we are missing something big, so clearly entanglement must exist alongside us, if we were able to apply entanglement to macroscopic objects we might see that perhaps its color changes thus causing the other object to change color, so and so forth (we all know where that was going)... so, am i missing something is entanglement a mathematical thing or does it actually happen?
Noumenon
1.8 / 5 (15) Dec 04, 2013
is entanglement a mathematical thing or does it actually happen?


Good question. If it forces us to disregard intuition and think in a new way unexpectedly, then its probably real.

When Schrodinger put forward his wave formulation, he thought of it as a Real wave of something, but Born's statistical interpretation ruined that illusion.

Is it a particle or a wave, or are these merely a means of conceptualizing the underlying reality in a way that is compatible with observation?

Much of the QM non-intuitive weirdness manifests imo, from conforming the underlying Reality to fit within our conceptual structure, a necessity for observation and ordering experience. Since we necessarily add 'something' to the final understanding, even if just conceptual form, all that we can know is 'reality as experienced' ( experimentation), and not Reality as it exists independently from us.

That Reality is "strange" is merely a epistemological artifact and a forgone conclusion
Mimath224
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2013
if you look at Relativity and QM from a mathematical standpoint then the 2 seem almost... so, am i missing something is entanglement a mathematical thing or does it actually happen?

& @ Noumenon '...That Reality is "strange" is merely a epistemological artifact and a forgone conclusion.'
I'm inclined to agree with both. Our mathematics attempts to model reality on both levels and after limitation we have to depend on statistical methods. For example, If GR is correct, or perhaps more specifically, Poisson's equation, and QM particles have some density then a grav potentional is implied. It's just so small we can't see it's consequence. Just as there is no 'analog' to BH accretion in QM (as far as I'm aware) so there is no 'anaolg' to particle entanglement in the macro state where c is max v for information.
MikeBowler
2.1 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2013
i think that reality is strange purely because some of it is different to what we percieve to be normal, for example solid objects give the impression that atoms would be quite solid but it has been found that a lot of it is emply.. gravity it causes things to fall but we just accept that as some sort of force until one day we're told that it's actually curved space-time, the earth looks flat but then you see a globe and find that it's a huge ball floating around, we look into the sky and think we're seeing stars, but some turn out to be planets and others galaxies, these are all rather basic things that prove that intuition can only describe so much and that our idea of normal is quickly turned on its head
Zera
1 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
As far as I am aware, current model states we are tensor fields, not so much a "physical" reality but a confluence of energy and not even a linear energy xpression but a rapidly expanding and then contracting bubble of information.

If we relate that back to what I understand of math/energy (admittedly nowhere near enough), there is positive, negative and nuetral.

1+1=2, to equal points in space, with no time should look more like
-1+1=0=-1+1, hence no time between state change.

So if there is a wormhole, does it not need to be composed of, or moving through something completely opposite/exotic? If it was completely opposite would the concept of time/motion be backwards? Would then not entanglement simply be a conversion bridge?

If there is a bridge between "matter" states between anti-, and "normal" would that not be a value of 0 time/state wise?

Has anyone ever arrested "matter"? To the point where there is complete zero motion/energy? Could we do so?
NeutronicallyRepulsive
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 04, 2013
Noumenon: It wasn't indeed reaction to you. So that's settled. I was just making an analogy to dispel the weirdness of concept of instant change at distance by pointing out classic example. I only did change gloves for boots, because gloves can more often look same for both hands. I did also note that it is not a full analogy, but rather an explanation (sentence "The only difference is, that the reality is inherently - in its core - this trade off between measurement and knowing.")

Mimath224
1 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2013
@Zera One should be aware that in some treatments of WH theory the 'pinch off' point of a singularity could produce at least 2 sets, T minus, T plus and T' minus, T' plus which might complicate the issue. Would any QM entanglement (movement, energy etc) be diverted? In such as case would we need the more general Spinor sets to account for QM entanglement and tensorial reality, that is, the involvement of manifolds rather than lines?
mayan
1 / 5 (11) Dec 05, 2013
First you should understand what SPACE is and GRAVITY is...then talk about Entanglement

YamaLok the Palace, abode of Hell, expands and contracts to accommodate the members...

Have seen Gurus , by looking at a person can see thru past & future thru remote vision and tell correctly 100% about past life ..

Another method : Also experiments were conducted with a Polaroid Photo of a Person, and tell about him correctly, Digital or inkjet printed photo will not work. Light should reflect from the person and fall on the Polaroid or Negative film. This method of remote vision works by Entanglement.
Zera
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 05, 2013
@Mayan:

Here's the scenario, you're in a room full of educated people, having a few drinks, maybe a cigar, the conversation is flowing well, the women are beautiful, the men handsome, topics and ideas are interesting and lively, and all of a sudden you act like a toddler - sticking your hands down your pants and begin to play with yourself.

The conversation stops, we're all amazed at your faux paux. Coughing the ladies turn away with a touch of grace, the men wanting to now be elsewhere begin to talk in other little circles, slowly we all move away.

"If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change." -The Dalai Lama

Keep your crazy theories to yourself!
met a more fishes
1 / 5 (10) Dec 06, 2013
This is definitely the place for crazy theories and I've got some of my own,i also don't immediately write off Mayans thoughts. Spatially separated entanglement and wormholes are one in the same. They occur when multiple points in space are the same point in space, no information travels ftl because is not traveling at all.eventually we will be able to manipulate this phenomena to the point of sending matter through wormholes but not for a while. I also don't believe in time, just a sequential ordering of particles, future and past are concepts existing in our minds.and matter, there's no matter just probability fields which have effect on other probability fields. But that would take at least another thousand characters
taka
1 / 5 (9) Dec 06, 2013
Matter cannot go throw these wormholes. They are formed by particles, how do you plan to send matter throw single particle? Matter that is made of particles? No way. But it may be possible to send information.
The so called probability wave is absolutely real, it is THE particle. The probability that particle react with detector in certain place is dependent of how intense this wave is in this point. When particle react with detector it INSTANLY change its shape and collapses. Single particle is also wormhole like. What we see in space as probability wave is more like his shadow. As detector is made to detect whole particle it require all particle energy to work and therefore particle wave collapses. So much about metaphysical observer effect.
taka
1 / 5 (9) Dec 06, 2013
Space is kitted from particles, they obtain distance by interacting. There is no space just pares of particles have distance and it happens that these distances form 3 dimensional space. Entangled particles form one entity, inside entity there is no space, it looks like wormhole but actually it is just outside space. No additional dimensions exists.

Time is just sequential changes in states connected by causal relations. Therefore time can be branching if there is not causal relations for synchronizing branches. Absolute time does not exists.

In lowest level both time and space are discrete. And there is nothing between.
met a more fishes
1 / 5 (9) Dec 06, 2013
Well i agree that we cannot send matter through these wormholes,i do believe once we stop trying to manipulate particles as thigh they are bits of matter on the macroscopic sense and start manipulating the probability field itself, we will be able to construct wormholes through which matter can be sent. Keep in mind i think wormhole it's a misleading term, but it serves as a place holder for this type of phenomena.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 06, 2013
conceptual revolution that QM forced upon physics?,.... local realism, counterfactuality, separability, causality, failure of absolute simultaneity, objective realism,.... Speculating about worm holes or multiverses is borderline metaphysics
-You'll note the resemblence to a mathematical equation. The difference being of course that words are no substitute for numbers. Scientists know this, which is why they abandoned philospeak long ago.

I think by 'borderline metaspastics' you mean 'crap'. Well you guys were saying that QM was crap and look at how wrong you were about that.

You're always wrong. But it usually takes a shovel to dig away all the word calcs and philospeak in order to prove it.

Proof is ultimately in the results. Philos have NEVER gotten any unless you count a paycheck or a few starry-eyed coeds. Nudge nudge.
PS3
1 / 5 (8) Dec 07, 2013
The wormhole explanation seems as obvious as Einstein gravity so it must be true.
davidivad
1 / 5 (6) Dec 07, 2013
I get the visual aid of a wormhole that connects the two because it is hard to believe there is no geometry between the particles with respect to the state of entanglement. Realize that the property you are measuring is not distance or time. obliviously, this aspect of measurement is where they touch. remember that spacetime is just another dimension.
goracle
3 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2013
cantdrive85 wrote:
Pseudo-scientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo.

Thanks for the summation, but we can view your comment history for ourselves.
ichisan
1 / 5 (5) Dec 09, 2013
Voodoo physics rules! Who will rise up to deliver us from this cr@p?
ichisan
1 / 5 (6) Dec 09, 2013
Pseudo-scientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo.


Chicken feather voodoo physics is what it is. Shame on the University of Washington and Stony Brook University in New York for feeding this cr@p to the public. This is insulting.
Mimath224
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 09, 2013
I think critics of these 'experiements' are forgetting one important point. The final outcome might dash our hopes completely but it's what might be discovered along the way where we learn more about QM and the universe in which we live.
radagasp
1 / 5 (3) Dec 09, 2013
@Tangent2

I like what you say. But I have to ask. Could it not be communication, but rather that both entangled particle are acting as one particle. Incidentally, I wonder about this idea of quantum communication - consider the case where to create a message we induce a spin on one particle of the pair by observing it... but when the corresponding particle of the pair is observed on the other side of the galaxy, this affects its spin, with no guarantee as to knowing what its spin was previously. How could we obtain information from that?
vlaaing peerd
not rated yet Dec 09, 2013
What if all black holes are already entangled, and the universe is more like swiss cheese than tapioca pudding...


⌐ ⌐ Dutch cheese. Dense Cheesehole theory of gravity says it needs to be smooth and stringy, not stinky and funghi stuff. "Swiss" was a mainstram science conspiracy to fund a big hadron cheese factory near the Swiss border.

Pseudo-scientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo.


Chicken feather voodoo physics is what it is..


no no, I said dense cheesehole, nothing about chicken feathers or mumbyjumbies.
Whydening Gyre
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 09, 2013
Sorry, but I'm still working on the discrete entangled particles thing... Is it JUST two particles being measured that are entangled? Do we know if there are any other particles being affected by a measurement than the two we are measuring? And HOW would we know if we're not looking...?
What if ALL particles are entangled and we only "see" the ones we are measuring?

More news stories

Making graphene in your kitchen

Graphene has been touted as a wonder material—the world's thinnest substance, but super-strong. Now scientists say it is so easy to make you could produce some in your kitchen.