3 ms·
As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem. Your comment
by dwaltrip 9y ago
As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem.
Your comment doesn't really give accurate credit to the current state of knowledge.
- bitL 9y agoYeah, it was kinda stupid in this context; I meant to show that some actions are happening "immediately" even across huge distances and not that we need to wait for e.g. gravitational waves to move at the speed of light. Not that we can actually utilize this for conveying information immediately.
- carapace 9y agoI think you're onto something. Yes, quantum entanglement doesn't seem to allow for transmission of information in the conventional sense. However... Take a universe full of particles, many of which are entangled with each other. If you consider the entanglement as primary you can think of the entangled particles as single entities that have "extensions" into space-time that can be widely separated. I don't think it's at all clear that "living" processes cannot be carried out on this "substratum" of interspersed non-local entities. But I'm waaaay over my head here, so I'll stop waving my hands. :-)
- samstave 9y agoWhat if quantum entanglement is simple an indicator that there is another way to send information - but we haven't discovered that function of that mechanism to do so yet?
- dwaltrip 9y agoIt's a fun idea. I'm not sure if there is any reason to think that quantum entanglement actually indicates this. I haven't heard anything like that before, and it doesn't seem like a small leap of logic, so I would guess not. But I'm also not a physicist.
- dogma1138 9y agoPossibly, but then it would break relativity and potentially a lot of other things.
- qbrass 9y agoThat's the point. Relativity is a barrier and we want a way to break through it.