Maia Mechanics is a modern chart creation tool for personal and professional use, featuring improved data entry forms and a Find Place feature for birth locations. It utilizes the JPL planetary database and the ACS International Atl. The application allows users to create unlimited charts and import charts from their library.
Maia Mechanics Imaging is the Human Design System software application for running charts for beginners or professionals. Users can easily calculate and view all Cycle and Transit charts used in Human Design analysis, including Saturn and Kiron returns, Uranus oppositions, Solar and Lunar cycles.
The application also offers Human Design Astrology charts that incorporate Human Design. The Human Design bodygraph is sometimes shown within a mandala overlaid on the 12 signs of the zodiac. Maia Mechanics Imaging is available for flat download on Jovian Archive.
In an astrological context, Chiron is often associated with themes of wounding and healing in the natal chart and planetary transits. By analyzing both Human Design and Astrology, users can uncover how to optimize different areas of their life.
In summary, Maia Mechanics is a precise and advanced chart creation tool for personal and professional use, offering a wide range of features and capabilities. It provides valuable insights into your design and can be used for both personal and professional use.
📹 Why Did Quantum Entanglement Win the Nobel Prize in Physics?
The Nobel prize in physics is typically awarded to scientists who make sense of nature; those whose discoveries render the …
Which type of astrology chart is most accurate?
The Vedic chart is the most accurate, as it aligns the zodiac with the constellations using the sidereal zodiac, whereas the Western chart, created around 275 CE, uses the tropical zodiac, which was once considered to be accurate.
Is Eastern or Western astrology more accurate?
In this article, Won, an astrologer, addresses the ongoing debate surrounding the precision of Vedic astrology in comparison to Western astrology. She asserts that Vedic astrology’s time calculations are more precise than those of Western astrology, and that the use of divisional charts and timing analysis is more detailed and accurate. Additionally, Won underscores the precision of the dasha timing system as a means of discerning personal timing and predictions.
What astrology system does Human Design use?
Human Design analysis involves planets displayed in a bodygraph, which shows the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching at various locations on the body. It is sometimes shown within a mandala, overlaid on the 12 signs of the zodiac. The Human Design System is a concept that has been explored in various sources, including books, articles, and articles.
The bodygraph is a type of horoscope that shows the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching at various locations on the body. It is sometimes shown within a mandala, overlaid on the 12 signs of the zodiac. The concept of Human Design has been explored in various publications, such as “The Zodiac by Degrees” by Martin Goldsmith, “Can Healing by Human Design improve your life?” by Ra Uru Hu, and “The Wizard’s Handbook” by Mario Garnet.
The Human Design System has been used to understand the human mind, body, and emotions, as well as to create personalized life blueprints and charts. It has been used in various sports, including the New Orleans Pelicans, to help individuals align their stars and achieve their goals. The concept of Human Design has been a topic of interest for many years, with its potential to improve individuals’ lives and overall well-being.
What is the difference between Human Design chart and astrology chart?
Human Design is a chart system that determines an individual’s unique energy flow and experiences. It is similar to a birth chart in astrology, but it identifies dominant chakras, energy centers, and gates. Human Design is a science of differentiation, focusing on how our energy moves through the world. It serves as a blueprint for our self-perception and interactions with others, revealing our consciousness configuration and decision-making roots.
The chart serves as a guide to living, working, investing, and expressing in a way that aligns with our true natures and highest selves. It is a complementary practice to astrology, offering a more specific and dynamic system of belief.
How does astrology software work?
Computer astrology programs today perform accurate planet position calculations, display and print these positions using astrological glyph symbols in graphic charts, save and retrieve individuals’ data to and from database files, compare the planet positions of different charts to find astrological aspects between them, calculate the dates of important events in the future for a chart, and research the saved chart database.
Some generate colorful geographical maps with lines showing where the planets rise and culminate at a significant time, usually the time of birth or the time of inception of an organization (called astrocartography).
Astrology programs usually come bundled with an electronic atlas, allowing the review of longitudes, latitudes, and time zone observance histories for cities and towns. Many assemble interpretive text about the various element combinations in a chart into comprehensive printed reports.
Software libraries exist to aid in the development of astronomical software and can be leveraged for use in astrological projects. One such tool is Swiss Ephemeris, an astronomical almanac developed by Astrodienst AG, Switzerland, the makers of Astrolog. It is widely used for calculating the positions of planets, moons, asteroids, and stars for a given date and time. The library can be integrated with several programming languages including C, C++, Java, and. NET.
Microcomputers are useful for astrological techniques because they can do the necessary calculating of planetary and house positions to at least one tenth of a degree. However, difficulties arise when the computer is used for the interpretive and interactive phase of astrology. Nine of the ten software programs reviewed by TopTenReviews. com in 2011 provide interpretive reports.
Which astrology site is more accurate?
Astrodienst, also known as Astro. com, is a popular site for free natal chart readings. It offers horoscopes written by human astrologers and computer-generated into a holistic birth chart for each individual. The site offers 16 different types of horoscopes, including Psychological, Money and Success, Career and Vocation, and The Child’s Horoscope, with free previews of buyable content. The horoscopes are written by various astrologers who view the chart through different lenses. The Personal Portrait is the most complete horoscope, but the Psychological Horoscope by Liz Greene is highly recommended.
Cafe Astrology is another site that offers horoscopes and astrological information about zodiac signs and planets since 2022. It is an encyclopedia of beginner astrology with numerous types of reports, both free and paid, as well as “cookbook astrology” such as descriptions of each planet in each sign viewed through the lens of a natal chart, love, or how the latest retrograde planet will affect your sign. Both sites provide valuable insights into astrology and provide a comprehensive understanding of one’s natal chart.
Does Human Design use western astrology?
Human Design is a holistic approach to understanding one’s personality, talents, and natural inclinations, incorporating various systems such as Eastern and Western astrology, I-Ching, the chakra system in yogic traditions, kabbalah from Jewish mysticism, and quantum physics. The chart in Human Design consists of 64 gates each with six lines representing six different energies, each with a significant meaning. Understanding one’s Human Design as an entrepreneur allows individuals to live according to their purpose without compromising their strengths or copying others.
Which form of astrology is most accurate?
Nādi Astrology is a detailed and accurate method of predicting the future based on the combined results of all sixteen divisional charts. However, it requires precise birth time and knowledge of genuine Nādi texts, which are often unpublished and kept secret by custodians. This is similar to Samhitā texts in north India, such as Bhrigu Samhitā or Rāvana Samhitā. Atma, the’real’ self, is immortal and characterizes the real self. It changes only to the physical bodies during common stages such as birth, childhood, teenage, adulthood, old age, and death.
Atma enters a different body based on one’s Karma and takes form based on their good or bad deeds. In Karmic terms, a transition like this is like a person being promoted or demoted based on their sincerely, honest, and efficient work in an organization.
Which chart is more accurate?
The most reliable method for displaying percentage changes and facilitating comparisons is the use of bar charts. They are optimal for the presentation of multiple data points and for the comparison of independent values. Readers are particularly adept at comparing the length of bars in bar charts, rendering them the optimal choice for illustrating comparisons.
Which astrology app is more accurate?
Astro Mukti is a comprehensive astrology app launched by Acharya Mukti Bhurtel, a globally acclaimed astrologer in India. The app offers various features such as chat, call with astrologers, tarot reading, face reading, palm reading, numerology, Vastu, and Western astrology services. It caters to global customers interested in astrology and provides in-depth personalized readings and accurate predictions for various life facets.
The app combines ancient Vedic astrology and spirituality with modern technology, allowing users to access seasoned and certified astrologers from the comfort of their homes. With just one click, individuals can receive personal guidance and insights from a variety of seasoned and certified astrologers.
Which astrology system is most accurate?
The equal house system divides the ecliptic into twelve 30 degree divisions, with houses measured in 30 degree increments starting from the degree of the ascendant. This system is more accurate and less distorting in higher latitudes, especially above 60 degrees, than the Placidean and other quadrant house systems. The definition of houses involves the division of the sphere into twelve equal lunes perpendicular to a fundamental plane, with the Morinus and Regiomontanus systems being notable exceptions.
Houses are measured out in 30 degree increments starting from the longitude of the midheaven, which acts as the starting point of the 10th house. The ascendant does not coincide with the cusp for the 1st house.
📹 Human Design’s Magical Mechanics of Personal Mystical Events
Would you like a human design introduction to the Magical Mechanics of Personal Mystical Events? LaVeena delves into the …
4:11 I appreciate you using phrases like “dogma” and heretic when referring to how the debate around quantum entanglement developed. It reminds us that even if science holds at its highest ideal that truth is what matters, it’s a system acted out by humans, whom can easily lock down thinking that falls outside the accepted narrative
Thank you for pointing out that Bell’s Inequality and the experiments honored by the Nobel Prize only rule out local hidden variables theories. I’m not saying I’m necessarily advocating for pilot waves or any other non-local theory, but it’s been annoying seeing articles discussing this topic completely ignore that they may be disproving locality rather than hidden variables.
My friend saw this article and he (a fellow Researcher but in the field of Virology) asked me (a physics PhD) why at 5:58 it is alluded that the entangled photon or electron pairs must have an opposite spin. I had to explain the law of conservation of angular momentum to him. This article was excellently made and simplified. Due to the uncharacteristically high interests in this topic from non-physics people, it is however good to mention even this simple aspects we usually take for granted.
Just wanted to say thank you for working this hard for people like us who are not necessarily scientists or someone important but just bunch of nerds(i say this very respectfully) who wants to learn more about the universe and its mysterious ways without getting to technical about the maths behind it.. I have got bachelor in physics and i have been perusal this chanel since i was in grade 11.. to be honest you guys are a big reason for me choosing to go for a physics degreee..and i am thankful for it.. i liked every second of my studies just because of the curiosity that you guys put into me..thanks very much..
Taking my undergraduate physics classes can be just a constant state of confusion with a few moments of satisfaction attained by comprehending a concept that are quickly squashed by a new even more complicated concept to understand. These articles give me a fun, easy to understand dose of physics that is still new and exciting for me.
My education is in business but my love is physics. I admit I do not have the brain to understand the in-depth aspects of all the branches of physics. This website is awesome in helping me understand on my level. Thank you particularly as I have a really easy time understanding you and staying attentive.
This, has consistently been the most in-depth youtube website when it comes to science. Other websites talk about how weird quantum mechanics is, without explaining anything. They just talk about strange stuff without the history and without the interpertations. This website talks about alternate explanations and some mathematical reasons as to why we believe quantum mechanics works the way it does. Bravo!
The biggest issue with the scientific community is the strong willingness to cling to dogma and ostracizing those that challenge the status quo. Scientists are human, but we have to put away hubris and be open to challenge and the testing of everything. This needs to be the case even if it results in previously established hard work being sent back to the drawing board or us being proven wrong. It’s chilling the number of brilliant scientists whose monumental contributions were only acknowledged, not by practical analysis by the scientific community, but said individuals being extremely determined to go against conventional wisdom and prove their worth. Who knows how many scientists that were brilliantly on to something, but backed down from pursuing it, as result of ridicule and negative support by the scientific community. For those that do preserve, and their findings demonstrated as plausible, it’s a bit irritating that all of a sudden, the scientific community supports and backs these individuals, pretending as if they were unbiased, and never demonstrated unnecessary ridicule or blatant disdain, during the initial process.
Alain Aspect is one of those strange cases like Einstein after his boffo publication outburst of 1905: everybody knew that they had to give him a Nobel, but they weren’t sure what for, or which one, and maybe some part of the whole thing was wrong. ‘Course this whole Bell’s Inequality thing is going to be with us for a while yet. We’re just in the opening rounds — again rather like the situation with quantum mechanics after Einstein’s 1905 photon seemed to be the ring to hold the wrestling match in.
I remember reading about the Bell inequality and the epr experiment when I was a kid and I’m really glad people went through and did the experiment. One thing that has puzzled me though is why took that experiment to convince people of non-localities/ indeterminism. The thing that really convinced me and frankly it was shocking and very disturbing was the first experiments with single Photon and single electron two slit diffraction. To this day I’m unclear why a careful examination of that seminal experiment isn’t as clear an illustration of non-locality/ in determinism. If anyone wants to explain how you can get single Photon and single electron to Slit diffraction patterns in a local/deterministic universe, I would be interested.
I’ve always wondered if quantum physics issues arise because we’re 3d creatures trying to understand multidimensional objects. What if entangled particles share a higher dimensional coordinate. Like how polynomial equations can have two answers, entangled particles intersect our 3d reality at multiple locations. So information isn’t traveling “faster than the speed of light” but instead it’s basically just one system connecting the two points in 3d space. This could also explain the weird shape of atomic orbitals and stuff in chemistry too. Those might be “perfect shapes” in higher dimensions.
Matt, I love your series! One comment – Sabine posits that Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance” is in reference to the instantaneous collapse of the wave function everywhere and not to entanglement. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on that. BTW it’d be fantastic if you would collaborate on some articles together!
Question! Is there a fundamental limit on how large an entangled system can be (not counting super-determinism)? Matt mentioned particles and molecules for size scale — I don’t necessarily mean physical size of each entangled piece, but rather how many particles/molecules can be entangled at once. I’d love to hear if that is a field of research that’s growing, or if that’s not a relevant possibility due to some maths principle I/we haven’t heard of just yet. Thanks!
Well done Matt on your fluent descriptions. I have one question regarding Quantum entanglement and the principle of instantaneous action at a distance. Assuming the two entangled particles measured by Alice and Bob, are each taken in their spaceships going in opposite directions at speeds that create some measurable time dilation; when the instantaneous action happens, do Bob and Alice see the effect happen at the same time, or is the ‘instant’ measured as being at the relative times of each? If the latter is true, on one objective perspective, the action takes place at a future time relative to the other and creates an interesting dilemma. If the former is true (ie at a time agreed by the observer to be the same (not sure how), then Alice and Bob measure the ‘instantaneous action’ as taking place at different times.
Regarding seeing the Lagrangian model laid out in full I personally can’t read it as an operation, but i very enjoy when you dive into the logic of why this variable is combined with that variable, vectored, etc. Don’t need to understand the full background to explain that we calculate speed as distance*velocity, etc, and it gets us close to really understanding the inner workings of the theories without having to grasp them in their entirety if you focus on one or two bits of it at a time. that’s personally how i looked up shrodinger, and started looking into the meaning of its symbols outside of the math, the logic of their workings, and i found a lot of flaws that im not scientific enough to fully expose on my own, but i still “*know*” better. cognition can take a lot of forms, scientific rigor isn’t what kept life alive on earth you feel? most humans dont even begin to grasp which extent.
Did you do an episode discussing whether two quantum particles are in fact part of the same structure in a higher dimension and their protrusion into our dimension appears as two different particles? Imagine a circle being passed through a sheet of paper at right angles to the paper. In the realm of the paper (2d world) it would appear that there are two distinct points but in fact it’s only one circle.
To be fair, Einstein used a superpositioned model to describe time/light using a train position and two observers. The problem with Einstein idea is he failed to understand, or even know that earth is rotating at 80K mph as it moves through space around the sun. A corkscrew if you will. This introduces a 4th dimension he was unaware of. Thus, the observer outside of the train would also see both lights at the ends of the train at different times because both the light from the front and back would be curved at different angles arriving at different times. Therefore, Einstein’s experiment was wrong.
Is my thinking correct? An electron exists in 2 states, call them, say, UP and DOWN with 50 % probability ( at . measurement ). 2 electrons A nd B, when ‘ entangled ” ( ie. a common field must now exist between them? ) are correlated – when one is up, ther other is down, and vice versa. Measuring in the same plane, up or down then IF A is UP, then B is always doiwn and vice versa. This must be the case because they are correlated and must be to preserve the conservation of momentum principle. The only ‘ spooky ‘ thing I see is that this link can stretch forever and for all time? In the case of a SINGLE electron through a double slit experiment producing a waveform ( Duality principle ) and the waveform being split ( which I assume does the ‘ entangling’ ) and sending two waveforms long distances from each other do we not observe that if one waveform is collapsed the other collapses IMMEDIATELY ? This too, is even spookier, I think.
Is entanglement a higher dimentional connection between quanta? If one of the entangled particles is relatively stopped as much as possible and the other(or the other inside a box) is accelerated to the speed of light. And then they meet together after a random period of travel(one spun more and the other spun less – we assume that it really spins). At the moment will they maintain the entangled state? If so, the experiment shows that entanglement is not deterministic and partly time-independent.
Bell’s Inequality is really complex, and while Bell himself tried to cover all possibilities (given that it was just ideas and not actual experiment yet) he still could have missed alternative explanations, like super-determinism and non-locality (and who know what else … perhaps assuming that hidden variables would be exactly corresponding to classical understanding, on which after all is always based the generally accepted conclusion that “there are no hidden variables”). While all ideas are interesting at least to consider and compare to each other, I don’t think super-determinism is the explanation. Not because I believe in free will (Free will only need not knowing that something is impossible or inefficient :)), but because I think it will lead to ridiculous paradoxes as the conscious observer or retro-causality that the dogmas of the standard model lead to. I’ve been following the randomness-determinism / local-variables topic for years now, and have to say that most of them just repeat the common interpretation “hidden variables don’t exist”, and only few (I can think of 3 at the moment) that consider the other alternatives. And one of these alternatives is non-Locality, which as Brian Greene put it “Locality is dead”. I’m grossly oversimplifying of course. Bell’s inequality theorem doesn’t kill Locality on its own, but when you consider also the experiments showing that sometimes it doesn’t work you should at least consider that so far we’ve only seen a sub-set of reality and laws of physics in which Locality works, and that perhaps it’s one of those classical ideas that we need to finally put to rest (or at least test very very much).
Dear PBS Space Time: is it possible that gravity waves could interact with themselves at great distances vs their source matter, in such a way as to explain the effects we attribute to dark matter? I wonder if there is a gravitational refraction effect taking place at a distance from other sources of matter, one that would create an amplification point to where the effect affects stars at the edge of a galaxy as if something else were physically there when its not?
Spiders web and the spider itself are entangled system ; an event happening anywhere in the web would not go unnoticed by the spider. The spider-web system is unique and non-fractional. Expanding the web to astronomical distance would not change any property of the spider-web system since its an entangled system. The moment a prey strikes anywhere on the web the spider notices it and hence both the computers(prey-spider) are entangled.
Thought experiment quantum relative, if an observer is a quantum relative to the particle being observed, then the particle as an observer would not be able to see if the relative is moving or the particle is moving relative to its cousin. This ratio would have to be used as a 1/2 pi unit circle where a full rotation is 1/2 tau. The same coordinates would be a 1/2 scale from the full spin… this would be balanced showing the entanglement is relative based on the observation of each particle
Would it be possible to launch a spacecraft toward Voyager that could act as a sort of signal booster between Earth and Voyager? The signals would still take the same amount of time to reach us, but because this craft would be closer to Voyager than the Earth, it could amplify and relay the signals from Voyager once Voyager’s signal is too weak to reach us on its own.
The point at which the spin of entangled particles is determined is when the wave-function of the measurement device becomes entangled with the wave-function of the particles. It doesn’t matter which particle is measured because both entangled particles share the same wave-function. The crucial point to understand is that these wave-functions don’t travel through physical space-time, they propagate instantaneously throughout Configuration Space, a complex-valued domain of potentially limitless numbers of dimensions where the wave-function is defined. No information is transmitted between particles in physical space-time, all entangled particle properties derive from their entanglement with the measurement device in Configuration Space. Thus, there is no information that travels through space at any speed, hence nothing that exceeds the speed of light. What we observe in relativistic space-time is the quantum mechanical projection of events that evolve deterministically in Configuration Space. Such events appear randomized to us because the projection into space-time is probabilistic rather than deterministic. In short, the universe we observe exhibits non-local realism, exactly as demonstrated by Bell Inequality experiments.
I’d like to be able to understand the proof of Bells theorem. Is that virtually impossible without having a PhD in quantum physics? Another thing I’m curious about and would like to do if possible. Could one write a program for a quantum computer that would essentially demonstrate the same results as the Alene experiment? Perhaps it wouldn’t include the demonstration of faster than light correlation, but could it demonstrate the violation of the hidden variable inequality?
When it comes to entanglement, the one thing I’ve never understood about it is why you can’t exploit information theory to get FTL communication using two entangled particles. It’s possible, at least from an information theoretic POV to encode data that doesn’t care about the relative orientation of the particles so long as it’s consistent. So, given that, what actually prevents FTL information transfer or, more likely, what have I missed?
For some reason, this year’s Nobel prize has really grabbed my attention and ever since I’ve been perusal articles on quantum physics, quantum mechanics quantum entanglement quantum fields… And quantum computing because I’m a software engineer. I’m like obsessed with it for some reason, I’m not sure why. I think the more articles that I watch I’m going to understand it all the sudden any more than physicists understand it already which is …not as well as I would like.
Sir you made my day as from perusal your lovely scientific description of Quantum Entanglement in the article has only further affirmed my understanding that the observable world around us could be in any state it only appears to be as it is only when we observe it. Therefore, we can rationally say the moon when we see appears to be as we observe but when not observed it could be in any state of wavefunction. The reason Einstein called the entanglement phenomena a spooky one is because he assumed that Quantum entanglement violates the light speed barrier not realizing that speed light is a man-made concept, but the actual observable world is indeed quite weird and therefore no classical quantum mechanical equation or experiment is enough to explain the observable universe without using the Quantum Entanglement phenomena.
There direct and simple way to understanding superposition using vectors and not waves. It goes like this… A classical vector can be decomposed mathematically as two orthogonal vectors. This idea can be applied to light. Light goes through the first polarizer you know the direction of it’s vector. So if it goes through a second polarizer 90 degrees it is blocked. However if it goes through a second polarizer at 45 degrees, you still get the same effect of light being the superposition of two orthogonal states thus what gets through is the projection parallel to the second polarizer. Entanglement is another story to attempt to explain simply i would have to assume all entangled particles are part the same coupled entity.
One thing that I’ve wondered about the various entanglement experiments is this: It there a way to contrive an experiment that allows us to know which of two entangled particles was measured first? If it is possible then the idea of relative time becomes truly confusing as the instantaneousness of events changes relative to the relative velocity of the observer of the events.
For 4 days. Was the theory of Schrodinger’s cat tested? Were the people in the submersible “Alive and Dead,” until observed? In quantum mechanics, Schrödinger’s cat is a thought experiment that illustrates a paradox of quantum superposition. In the thought experiment, a hypothetical cat may be considered simultaneously both alive and dead, while it is unobserved in a closed box, as a result of its fate being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. This thought experiment was devised by physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935
I always thought about it this way. You have one black and one white ball. You put each in a box and mix them up. Send one to the moon and the other stays with you. To know, without opening the box, the color of the ball you have, someone needs to open the box on the moon and send you that information. It’s not about knowing what’s going on elsewhere that matters. It’s about knowing what’s going on in your own frame of reference that matters.
Now, I only teach Middle School science but the thing I can’t seem to wrap my head around is the causal relationship between observing and the reaction. Like, how is it that my brain interpreting the information my eyes took in had any more impact on what’s inside the box then the light ricocheting around the box and hitting any non-living matter. Am I taking this all to literally? What counts as a observation?
Is it that “each” view of an entanglement severs the connection, therefore can only send a single binary, meaning 8 paired particles equals 8 bytes… and once all the particles are viewed, then there is no longer a way to communicate? . Next question, if yes… considering there is actually quantum teleportation, why not always teleport an entangled particle through each “signaling” to keep the quantum communication going? . If able to teleport 2 particles through a single quantum entangled particle… can that then be made to provide constant electrical power from a power source from any distance… and can that also be used for traversing across space fueled from Earth* (*etc)?
Please Help With This Question If Able; It seems that in QM the terms “know” and “choose” are used quite often. To my simple mind these seem like things exclusive to living creatures. Rocks don’t “know”. Photons don’t “choose”. We talk about a possible exchange of information at TSOL which might violate Causality but I have to ask…What information is being transmitted/sent/divined between the two entangled items in question? What form is it in? What method is used to encode/decode or make sense of the data by a particle without the capabilities of discernment. Basically, how does it know what it’s supposed to know? If we can’t say what is passing between the two, how it’s being done, and how these “choices” are made then that all seems to support the Hidden Variable Theory.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. These two entangled particles do not share a causal relation. They are sister effects of a common cause. It is just the case that they are superimposed so that information may be gleaned through the process of elimination given the simplistic polar/binary nature of the experiment.
2:25 .. Hmmm but there’s still one BIG hole in this theory. Opening one box won’t “magically” tell the other ball the box has been opened and the color has been chosen. That information still HAS to travel and that’s where speed of light kicks in, am I right? 🤔🤔 In simple words, there’s is a communication between both boxes at all the time and making any changes to one box will still take it’s sweet little time to “travel” to the other box and inform the situation. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
Quantum entanglement is usually referring to the entanglement of energy in double bonds to the point of electrons and the bond breaks or the election spins off the halogen or transition metal nearby. The superposition and spin flip issue is the functional quality of the NMR or MRI imaging system. They appear to be mixing their metaphors.
I personally thing that the quantum state of the entangle particles is not undefined before the measurement, instead, it is possibly redefined on the measurement. The possibility that the state is sensitive to the measurement is significant. However whether or not this measurement transmit information to influence the other end of the particle it still a mystery.
Thank you for this explanation in a very understandable way. One question: Is it possible that all laws of physics have to take into consideration and make adjustments to the basic fact that everything is traveling thru space? We are never at one spot in the fabric of space at any moment. This factor has to be equated in all laws of physics, I would imagine. Follow up question: Is it possible that the laws of quantum physics don’t have to follow this “basic” factor?(the factor for the fact that we are all traveling) ? Sorry if the question is too ignorant.
So a idea i had with qauntum entanglement. We have the capabilities to entangle 2 particals to the point we can send secure emails through this. So what if we developed a way to entangle a particle n send 1 to a black hole if its possible then we can see what happens to the other particle when the other hits the event horizon 🤔
Box is not a good analogy. Box gives the impression of the result is pre-determined. A better analogy is with two coins that keep rotating on floor. You can take it everywhere and they both still have 50-50 chance of head or tail. at one point if you stop the rotation one coin, the other one doesn’t stop spinning. But when you stop the other coin, you always needed up with opposite of whatever you collapsed perviously. You always end up with one head and one tail.
This youtube article is superb! The example of Clauser and his student persisting on their idea after being thrown out of Feynman’s office inspires me. I will go to my thesis director’s office tomorrow and start my crusade to prove that the Earth is flat. If he throws me out of his office tomorrow, I am on a good path toward receiving a Nobel prize in the future.
CHRISTMAS DAY – December 25, 2022 – 192 data centers around the world were tested using the Star Link Satellites in the 24 Time Zone for the Quantum Financial System . 100% successful . The Military will give the Green Light for activation for us TIER 5 – Banking – today January 15, 2023 expect and Update ?
A lot of these articles are misleading regarding Einstein. Einstein never denied the existence or properties of Quantum Mechanics. He simply said it’s “incomplete” which is still true to this day. People knew the existence of gravity and used it before Einstein. That’s where Quantum Mechanics is at today. But after Einstein, we “understood” gravity and its application expanded greatly. Einstein simply said Quantum Mechanics is not at that point yet.
What if polarizers are slightly changing the polarization of the particle traveling through? This would only work with difference in polarization angles is less than 45 degrees. The particle would adjust its polarization to the polarizer’s. This might also explain the “erasure experiment” with 3 polarizers: if you change the polarization gradually, the particle can go through, while a 90 degrees change directly makes the particle impossible to pass. I’m not a physicist. I am curious why this hypothesis is not acceptable.
Could the photon be carrying “info” through its energy interactions? Energy on its own is in a rest state, it does nothing. The electron field around mass only becomes active when there is heat. Like imagine if the sun just disappeared… the world would just freeze and stop spinning. I think the photon governs the quantum world in more ways than we give it credit for.
A different interpretation that might be fun to try and experiment out-of: if quantum measurements produce a “residue”, during which the rest of the universes experiments are random, but in order to get them, at you is where a negative reaction is kinda… resonating. Not that the quantum state “collapses” between the particles, but that you serve as a “filter” which only some, one, or none of a set can be detected. Probably just flips the sign / inverts it, but could be neat to explore.
Einstein was afraid that influence was faster than the speed of light? That is interesting. When bringing in the concept of being the creators of our own universe, kind of makes sense that we ARE capable of creating or manifesting by changing our vibration. Therefore, a hidden variable is undecided until intention is behind a thought, and a thought is an influence that changes our vibration. A thought is faster than the speed of light?
So how are they measured to know they are in superposition in the first place because if there are only two colors possible where did you get them from how do you know? How many times was this performed? Was there previous knowledge that these particular particles would only be these two colors and if this is true then entangle two particles that are not the same and give them the properties where when one is observed the other has to be one specific color and see it’s false just because you got a percentage higher on the you are right side only means done an indefinite very long period of time the percentage will slowly grow to a almost 50/50 outcome
Coming up with a theory that postulates a model of quantitative relationships and interpretations which fits existing observations and explain existing problems is one part of the scientific process. The other, more underrated part, is coming up with clever ways to produce viable observations that stress the peculiar corner case hypothesis of said model.
I believe the whole model is flawed, because the two slit experiment was not carried out properly. I think there are edges present always, and the electron is simply carried on one of the nodes of those interference waves to the target. The experiment need to be shielded from all other waves and tried again. I believe if you do that the interference pattern will disappear.
Doesn’t the atom releasing the photons see a particular polarizer at the time of creation back through the calcium crystal regardless of which one it is directed to for measurement? You still are affecting the creation of the photons even if you arent doing detection in the same state that the system was in when you generated the photons. If that is the case with his setup that is and the path from polarizer to exited ion beam was not opaque.
What if the entangled particles don’t break causality and the information doesn’t travel faster than light. Maybe its just higher dimensions that allow for the distance to be zero and therefore any changes instant. The universe sets 3 dimensional rules as a smoke screen and then schrodinger’s the cat out of us.
It is an extremely important point that the entanglement before the collapse of the wavefunction is actually a more simple and elementary state than if they carried the information about their final states with them the whole time. I think there is a misunderstanding that this is a more complicated setup than a “classical” setup with more information.
So an idea struck me years ago, and I’m curious what people more travel ned in the subject matter would think… Since photons travel at c and what we know of relativistic effects is that time would dilate infinitely at c. So from the perspective of a photon, no time passes. This would necessarily mean that from the photons perspective, no time passes between emission and absorption. It is simply energy in one system’s local then immediately energy in another system’s locale. So the idea is that this could then imply that a photon cannot be emitted unless it is also absorbed. Since no time passes in it’s frame of reference, it cannot decay. But can it be emitted “into the ether” without an absorbing partner? Is the universe an open or closed system? Can a photon intended for one target actually be intercepted by another target? Or would it have known its destination even before that destination received the impulse to be in its path? To that end, is the concept behind the experiment described in this article even sound? Or are we just arrogantly assuming that our apparent free will might be a little illusory than we usually want to believe? Or to tie it back to the emitter/absorber framework, is that photon the cause of excitation in the absorber, or excitation of the absorber the cause of the photon?
i think we’re bridging the gap between universes… i theorize entanglement actually depends on variability of the origins of the universe. similarly the way localization depends on determinism. the possibilities of the creation of the universe have to be in a flux, infinitely finite… I suspect just as there are “goldilocks” planets there are “goldilocks” universes for existence to function with life… I imagine the universe beginning similar to cell mutations. I imagine the tree of life as time and space were created. where certain energies had to have polarizing effects enough to balance but not enough that one would overcompensate.
For entanglement to happen, as observed, the particles have to be placed near each other. They cannot be entangled if one of the particles exits far apart, like 100,000,000 miles, for example. Therefore, an ACTION has to take place to get them entangled. If all it takes is an ACTION, like motion, then there must exist in nature entangled particles. Has anyone discovered an naturally occurring entangled particle?
The main question is whether quantum entanglement can be used as a faster-than-light signal and that answer should be addressed in these public forums. If there are two entangled particles when one is measured does the other particle indicate it has condensed into a known state such that if one particle was measured on one side of the universe and some device monitoring the other entangle particle on the other side of the universe would instantly see that the other entangled particle had been measured? If the requirement is that the second particle has to also be measured to determine its quantum state that would have of course cause it to loss its entanglement canceling the ability to have instant communication. This would still allow for faster-than-light communication. If the particles were separated by light years with particles than could maintain their entanglement indefinitely then a monitoring point of some time less than the light years between them could be chosen to determine the entangled state that would result in faster-than-light communication.
I dont get how einstein didn’t grasp “spooky action at a distance” photons do not experience time because of their relativistic speed. As far as the photon is concerned it is enormously long and connected to both it’s starting point and its ending point simultaneously. If this is true, and its twin particle is also experiencing the same effect then the particles have never lost contact and can influence each other until one or both are destroyed. Im clearly a lay person so please don’t abuse me for how dumb this sounds if im wrong
Look, when it comes to physics.Einstein did what he had Access to of course, people are gonna find other methods of going around it and I’m all sure and I’m late in his equations because that’s the point to keep going to Find More things if you get stagnant at 1 equation Then you’re not thinking we understand you shouldn’t be. Able to do it, you can’t, but people will always find a way. Life always finds a way
Correct me if I am wrong, but you shouldn’t be able to keep particle entangled from earth to the moon. In my mind, the resonance frequency with respect to space time will differ based on both the gravity/time of the moon vs earth as well as time dilation cause by traveling through space/time. This should pull the two particles’ resonance out of symmetry. Just seems like if it remained entangled, then
Once we can totally understand the physics behind entanglement, instant communication with alien worlds will be possible. I venture further to say that this will also lead to reaching instantly any place in the universe without having to travel the distance. By then we will also be able to transfer our “self” into artificial bodies, making us virtually immortal. Unfortunately though, all of us alive today are still evolutionary garbage. But future generations will live the dream and populate many of the infinite worlds this and other universes are offering.
Everything that you are saying means that you must know that “YOU, YOURSELF, AS YOU WERE AND ARE AT SOMEPOINT IN TIME” Reflects “OUR” conditdition to explain away methods to JUST entertain intelligent Human Beings to pass the time of our existance “HERE”. At least in “THIS” in OUR “SHARED WORLD. Does anyone realise that it will not be a comet or well “aimed rock” that will end all 0f “HU5MniTY” BUT U5 ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤🌍 19:08
Actually, 3 guys won for spinning the best, most imaginative yarn. Yes, it’s a very educated yarn. But, you can never truly know the answer to this theory until you can BE a second, exact consciousness (identical twin consciousness) in two places at the same time. You would also need someone with the ability to be a second identical consciousness of their own, that is trusted by ALL, unbiased, and in the same place as the first to be a witness. Theories = guesses… Autistic-ly organized guesses 👍🏼 But I’m here for it!
I’m probably just not smart enough to understand but I don’t believe that what we see when this test is run is information traveling faster than the speed of light. I believe we are just seeing the resulting “reality” we chose as a result of the test. We are not seeing light or information traveling faster than light, we are simply now “living” in the resulting “reality” or “universe” that is the result of the choice made. I’m sure I’m not explaining it right but it’s like the old Dungeons and Dragons games where you are faced with a choice. When you make the choice, you then “live” the resulting outcome of the choice. It’s not info traveling faster than light within the universe but instead we are now “placed” into the universe with that choice. Am I crazy?
Summary, photons are outside of time and distance. Therefore all photons are in a dimensionless point. There is no distance between any photons. Because photons are outside of time they are eternal. This leads to a possible paradigm shift in physics. This is explained well from this quote: The special theory of relativity predicts that for an observer moving at the speed of light distance traveled shrinks to zero while time slows to standstill. Thus as far as light itself is concerned it does not travel any distance, and takes no time to do so. As Gilbert Lewis showed back in 1926, from lights point of view the Universe is so bent that there is no separation between the point of emission of light and its point of absorption… If light does not experience itself to have traveled any distance, it does not need a vehicle or mechanism by which to travel … it’s only in our frame of reference, the frame of observers with mass who move at sub light speeds, that light appears to travel through space and time; and only in that frame does the question of whether it is a wave or particle or both arise. Peter Russell’s from Mad About Modern Physics. Much more to follow.
Quantum Entanglement and the constant identical behavior of a perfect pair of subatomic particles billions of lightyears away is very much equal to the theory of Twin Flames/Twin Souls in terms of Human Existence and matters of one believing they are divinely destined to be with their “other half”. Intriguing that Science and Divine Love can come together and confirm a very extraordinary way of existence. I love life! A tremendous amount of mysteries to be discovered to make life more interesting and enjoyable!
why u ask…cuz actually Man or Life is compose of 2 entanglements of 2 Entities: Spirit(Soul) & Physical(Body)..Balls or Spheres(spherical matter in Shape) big & small have only 2 kinds of Motions ; Spin to the Left or Spin to the Right..Quantum bubbles because there are..no Cube bubbles(air,or water droplets), bubbles are always sphericals, the fundamental shape shape of matter.
i give you hint, we forgot about EMERGENCE, we are focused on ENTANGELMENT, if we change our point of view you will find out that ELONGATION is closest to TRUTH at the moment. Quantum elongation would resolve most of the problems, speed of light adds up to speed of emitter. History repeats itself in EVERY possible “Frame of Refernce”. Quantum information – information is distributed everywhere in space at instant, so EPR as an ‘elongation’ would not be a paradox or any other SPOOKY action
It still somehow feels like we are missing something elementary about quantum mechanics. What if photons don‘t HAVE atomar characteristics? What if they have a spectrum of characteristics, predetermined nonetheless. That would invalidate all experiments until now and would honor locality AND realism. We would only ever measure ONE particular outcome and never all „hidden parameters”. Like… the venn diagram, but with blurred edges…
What did the 2022 Nobel Prize winners in physics discover in depth? Quantum mechanics is an incomplete theory. Classical locality doesn’t work in quantum physics. The quantum theory is fundamentally nonlocal. Overall, the 2022 Nobel prize recognises that the fundamental nature of our physical world is still unknown. “We have to give up the idea of realism to a far greater extent than most physicists believe today.” /Anton Zeilinger, the Nobel Prize in Physics 2022/
I’ll tell ya’ll how this sh*t works. Oh, but if this gets taken seriously, please don’t bring it back to me, i kinda prefer people not walking up to me everywhere i go and whatnot. Right, firstly we need to talk about light waves. We’ve seen the drawings ~⚕ with their peaks and trophs. BUT thats not what they actually look like. Are you forgetting we live in a 3 dimensional world. The light waves spiral in 3 dimensions. You can see what I mean if you take a spring, and stretch it out a little; it’ll have this spiral form/shape obviously; but keep it stretched at just the right amount, and look at it from the side; you’ll see it looks like the wave drawings with their highs & lows. Now take another spring, stretched same amount as the former one. Face it opposite to the former one; and move them towards each other; you’ll find that you can rotate them around each other in a way that kind of joins them together. Remember they’re completely opposite each other, and rotating in opposite directions(i think). Now then; these (3 dimensional) light waves bounce off particles right. So what happens is, one of them bounces of a particle, while the other bounces of another particle; AT THE CORRECT ANGLES, so that they meet like the aforementioned two springs. Then when one from one particle, having rotated around other lightwave, gets to the other particle, it bounces off, as does the other lightwave from the particle it gets to; and they go right back, and right around each other again; but really they never fully stopped going around each other.
Please review Ron Cowen’s article in 2015-Nov-19 Nature on spacetime being an emergent consequence of quantum entanglement. It appears to be compatible with Maldacena’s AdS/CFT correspondence – that’s a nice start. I hope you will investigate and present your findings/opinions in a dedicated post soon.
You didn’t explain correctly the quantum balls. By opening one box you saw a color, which automatically tells you the other’s ball color. But if you close and reopen the same quantum box, sometimes you see the other color. Color is then PROBABILISTIC! Not deterministic. This is against common sense… but quantum mechanics is probably incomplete…
There is no spooky action at a distance because the wave in the wave equation isn’t physical, it is a probability distribution that gives you a probability after a measurement for that measurement. The intrinsic concept of probability and statistical inference is that the deductive epistemic-ontological status of an individual object can’t be known with certainty. Also, the Nobel Prize committee misrepresented and quite possibly misunderstood what was meant by what John Clauser, Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger did and what was meant by what John Bell stated. It really is quite shocking https : //www . youtube . com/watch?v=XOIjsh7Ixz8 Some physicists have got their knickers in a metaphysical knot through trying to physicalize the Schrödinger equation and the results of the equation.
How smart is man..the beauty of us. To even looks at the years. Last hundred years..wow. I have taken classes, years ago, in chemistry. Back when I was 22. The chem8cal compounds and bonds, fascinating. The periodic table of elements. I know we are all carbon life forms with need for H20. Like all science great. The study of environments. Now fifty, bipolar condition. Theories are proven and make are world. Ii am also as an element. The element of surprise. Caron macisaac YouTube website. Xo this stuff is fascinating. The scientists I mean. Read a book years ago about the effects of emotions on water. A microscopic venture. Controlled experiment. Book of pictures. Fascinating….xo
I’m fully aware that it’s actually quite common for a Nobel prize in a particular category in a particular year to be awarded to multiple recipients, it seems somewhat poetic when the subject at hand is entanglement, right? My cursory understanding of quantum entanglement betrays my little joke. For one thing, while I know that a large quantity of particles may be entangled, they’re generally entangled in two “teams”. I don’t think there’s a three-state entanglement model, right? We talk about pairs usually, because our quantum measurements can only detect one thing at a time, and only in binary format, as I understand it. And for the other thing, the measured state of two entangled pairs will oppose one another. So if we were to take the joke literally (and also we reduce it to two recipients to satisfy the first thing) one laureate would gain 10,000,000 Swedish krona ($950K US or $1.4M AUD), and the “entangled” ⁻laureate (I had to google a superscript minus to get that, and I also had to Google lots of other things to make this stupid comment) would have to pay the same amount rather than being awarded that amount. So it’s poetic as long as you don’t spend too much time thinking about it and you don’t have a lot of background knowledge on the subject.
At 7:29 you talk about polarisation being undefined until measurement (I think you should say interaction but, what ever…) vs defined at creation and then you make the leap that “by measuring those polarisations” they could do a Bell. What magical polarisation test can infer this? This is the crux of the matter and it’s the only thing you didn’t explain!
6:12 very strange that Feynman could be against. “gpt3q: was feynman against performing a bell test? a: No, Richard Feynman was not against performing a Bell test. In fact, he played a key role in developing the mathematical framework for understanding quantum entanglement and the implications of Bell’s theorem. Feynman believed that a proper understanding of quantum mechanics was necessary for performing a Bell test, and he believed that the results of such tests could provide important insights into the nature of quantum mechanics.”
2024 here. Unfortunately, Nobel laureate John Clauser seems to have lost his marbles and has become a staunch Climate Change denier using some of the most-garbage reasoning and fallacies one could come up with. So, apparently you either die a hero or live long enough to become a shill for the fossil fuel industry.
All the fluoride I drank and brushed my teeth. Is stopping my brain from access this knowledge to even understand this. This guy is explaining everything perfect and I still don’t understand exactly what’s the purpose of this. So can we travel space faster or can replicate ourselves in a different planet??
Revelations 4:6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind. The corn. If you have a perfect understanding of the symbols, then you know what they imply, according to creation. The corn. Rev 4:6. This is why quantum entanglement is made possible, now that you know the truth where is my Nobel prize? Frequency, energy and vibration is true, but there must also be clarity! Anyone free from darkmatter, and dark energy in their eternal sea of glass will cause it to vibrate if they’re on a whole Nother level of frequency, depending on who they’re entangled with. clarity, transcends dark particles. When that which is last becomes first, and I cause that which is first to become last, dumping all the energy out of the last into the first, this, causing the structure of the first and the last while intangled to collapse, and all of this is controlled by consciousness.
Cartoons and laser light balloons! I used a laser light to entertain my cats. This isn’t new information because it sounds familiar. They even did a movie using the quantum mechanics theory called “Somewhere in Time”. which uses a fabulous musical score, btw. H. G. Wells wrote about it Iin the film The Time Machine!
I am a huge fan, but for some reason, occasionally while perusal i fantasize about being there and heckling in real time – you seem like an excellent performer to heckle… Im not typically prone to this, but there’s an absurdity in the little cartoon bubbles that incarnate in me head all lick-tin-stein “larmes”-ey, with a really lame “family circus” type aesthetic and corresponding dialogue… I flop mostly in this internal production, but it still lands… It makes me laff. I hope this enagagement way encouraging and beneficial. Abba -bientot dawg
Wondrous is our Universe, empirical. Two knights were fighting a duel fiercely over a gorgeous and graceful woman they both loved passionately. Passers-by amused, applauded and applauded. I too joined them, witnessing the duel on the TV screen. Millions of bright and dark pixels were impinging on the screen, but my mind could build up a picture, making use of the famous Rorschach process. Is the Universe built up in the same manner which requires a Witness and a Screen? Yes! (An extract from the book ‘The Empirical Universe and Beyond’ by Naresh Rastogi. 1921.)
No Information is transferred faster than light in any meaninful way in your example. You would never know whether the quantum state of your box had collapsed without checking, and by checking you’d collapse it anyway. So you’d need to confer at or below the speed of light to understand who “sent” the information.