I'm trying to get you to think about it logically. If you received a particle, how would you know it was in an entangled state? Where would that information come from?
Discussion
What I’m trying to teach you is much more important than what you’re trying to teach me.
The statement “I’m trying to get you to think about it logically” is a pejorative defence mechanism you are using because you are uncertain of your own knowledge and arguments.
No true expert ever feels the need to belittle anybody they are talking to.
This is how I know you don’t know this subject very well. I don’t either, but I do know enough to have any discussion at any level with any expert in any field without any pejorative baggage.
Your core statement was that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This is mostly true, but there are exceptions to this and they are discussed in many papers, here is one:
https://bigthink.com/technology-innovation/what-travels-faster-than-the-speed-of-light/
Once your core tenet fails, then you are immediately weakened in all subsequent attempts.
With respect, in this situation, despite my stupidity and lack of knowledge in almost every area of any learning, I am the teacher here not you.
You can change the spin direction of such particle through spin manipulation (e.g. using magnetic fields) and that would change the spin of the entangled particle too. This way you can codify messages using binary code, since you now essentially have a switch that has two states (e.g. up=0, down=1).
This way one can send information faster than c, including the message "new entangled particle, who dis?”, so the receiver of the particle doesn't need to know a priori that the particle is entangled.
Oh my god, that's not what happens. This thread is so unbelievably frustrating. As soon as you change the state of one of them you break the entanglement
Which only means is far from our current ability to use in that way. The problem of the entanglement breaking is not a problem if you can rebuild it at distance.
They are only "entangled" in the first place because they are created together and some properties have to be conserved. They are not actually connected. It's just that measuring one *implies* you know what the other one has to be, *if* you get the information that they are entangled.
Have you read this book ?
From the reviews :
“I was wandering the stacks of the social sciences at the Mizzou library for some books I needed for a research paper when I suddenly found myself in the the middle of large, dark tomes with authors like Einstein, Oppenheimer and Bohr. I was lost. But then I noticed a small colorful, brightly colored book with the irresistible title, ‘Stalking the Wild Pendulum.’ It was red and white with little cartoons inside, so I checked it out. At home, I delayed work on my own research to read it. It completely blew my mind. It contained a theory of the beginning and development of the universe including humankind and it went on to describe the development of consciousness and its drive to know itself. That book had a profound effect on my worldview. I’ve read thousands of books throughout my lifetime but I’ve never forgotten this title or it’s author, Itzhak Bentov. A few years ago I Googled it to try and find a copy. Unfortunately the version I read was no longer in print but I found this one which is much expanded. I’m still blown away. You will never think of the universe, or you place in it, the same way. I can’t recommend it highly enough.”
