interested

So once particles are entangled and separated one can be manipulated and not be counted as a measurement, the particles would remain entangled, and then a measurement could be taken, giving the state of the other entangled particle as soon as the measurement is taken. Can you expand on the above statement.

Is this like taking two polarized photons and splitting them to produce two entangled pairs of photons, with known polarizations, then passing ONE of the polarized entangled photons through another polarizing filter changing its polarization, and measuring them to compare the polarization of both the entangled pairs. Could entangled electrons if they are separated be affected by a magnetic field https://phys.org/news/2015-07-spin-entangled-electrons.html likewise could entangled electrons and photons be affected by polarization filters or magnetic/electrostatic fields. PS how is an electrons spin altered, I thought all fermions had 1/2 spin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)

Is it not a case of the chicken and egg, quantum fluctuations do not exist without waves and vice versa.

Why would two photons interacting have to produce a particle and antiparticle. Could Dark Energy in outer space assist in the separation of particle antiparticle pairs. Would the pairs produced have to be initially entangled. If dark energy is due to random quantum fluctuations, could these be the source of any of the outstanding particles in the SM. Edit: Can 2 virtual particles combine to form a real particle. Energy can not be created or destroyed! would virtual particles in the early universe be more energetic than they are today. Do you have any insight into this mystery.

Is that possible or are we into pop science again.

Wave functions can also describe quantum fluctuations, I found a paper on it, it also explains entanglement in terms of wave functions. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1402/1402.4764.pdf Reality of the wave function https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function Whilst Heisenburgs uncertainty principle gives answers. Waves give a plausible explanation as to why there is quantum fluctuations filling all of space.

Apologies I was being lazy forming my question. I should have stated the particles are separated by an arbitrary distance. I fully recognize that entanglement is a delicate thing and particles can decohere. It was as you say not a very practical example. Why is it commonly thought by many that once particles are entangled moving one of the pair instantly affects the other, and that this can be done repeatedly. Ie changing the polarization or spin of one photon will change the other photon. Who put the idea out there first. I was reading about wave functions and quantum fluctuations this morning and entanglement and non locality came up yet again.

I dont know what level you are at, but I was googling wave functions this morning and found this link which my be helpful to you https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/quantum-physics/atoms-and-electrons/v/quantum-wavefunction It gives a brief 10 minute over view at the noddy level.

Thank you all for the answers In simple terms, trying to summarize. Are you all stating that, if two entangled particles exist at opposite sides of the universe, we can not know the state of the both particles until we measure one of them, once this measurement is done we instantly know the value of the other. No magic or additional dimensions involved?

Is this where a black hole event horizon comes in useful. Similar to Hawking radiation. Could the experiment work, and would it have to produce a particle and antiparticle?

Thanks for that. Someone recommended using arxiv in my searches when looking for detailed papers. Does the second link above have a consensus https://phys.org/news/2015-11-nist-team-spooky-action-distance.html or does anyone else have a differing opinion

I am seeking some clarification ref quantum fluctuations in space. What could they caused by? The quantum effects are probabilistic, not deterministic. Therefore, a quantum fluctuation has no "cause." Quantum fluctuations are a point change in the energy of a volume of space due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Can they be viewed as a result of interference waves moving at light speed in various directions, (similar to the double slit experiment), creating an apparent probabilistic and not deterministic effect. If they are viewed in this way they have a cause but it is not possible to calculate there appearance other than via probability theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation

Some time ago I suggested that if electrons and positrons could become gamma rays then gamma rays could become particles. I played with the idea for a while and lost interest. Recently I stumbled across this link to a planned experiment https://phys.org/news/2018-03-underway.html#nRlv converting photons into particles. Could radiation from a black hole become particles? Could radiation from the Big Bang become particles?

Are you contradicting your self, please explain "but their are non local correlations" As examples here is a link to a paper demystifying none locality https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1205/1205.4636.pdf concluding non locality is basically nonsense, and then here is another link claiming non locality is a proven fact https://phys.org/news/2015-11-nist-team-spooky-action-distance.html, and then here is another explaining it via another dimension https://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0307/0307117.pdf . As you are aware I am easily confused. Are any of the papers on none locality based on provable fact, or is it just a case of physicists having a laugh. Do you think non locality is fact fiction or is still not 100% clear.

Are non local interactions fact or fiction, or is the jury still out. If I google for proof of non locality and it is everywhere, then I google for explanations of non locality using standard theory and I find it.

Maybe https://www.nature.com/news/quantum-bounce-could-make-black-holes-explode-1.15573

Chandrasekhar limit From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Chandrasekhar limit (/tʃʌndrəˈʃeɪkər/) is the maximum mass of a stable white dwarf star. The currently accepted value of the Chandrasekhar limit is about 1.4 M☉(2.765×1030 kg).[1][2][3] White dwarfs resist gravitational collapse primarily through electron degeneracy pressure (compare main sequence stars, which resist collapse through thermal pressure). The Chandrasekhar limit is the mass above which electron degeneracy pressure in the star's core is insufficient to balance the star's own gravitational self-attraction. Consequently, a white dwarf with a mass greater than the limit is subject to further gravitational collapse, evolving into a different type of stellar remnant, such as a neutron star or black hole. What do you make of these scientists claim from last year, https://mashable.com/2017/05/31/x-ray-laser-molecular-black-hole/#gGkllTNunSqA This BH is a bit smaller than than 1.4M☉

Virtual particles/quantum fluctuations can disappear without a trace. Spacetime is full of quantum fluctuations. Black holes may be able to evaporate due to hawking radiation. Smaller black holes radiate more xrays than larger black holes increasing there rate of energy loss. What happens to them below the Chandrasekhar limit it is not obvious do they supernovae or something else. Laws of thermodynamics suggest they will be full of radiation. If they did explode the energy/mass absorbed by the black hole would be released/reappear.

No 3 The following may not be 100% correct but I guess someone will correct me. Space is dynamic and is continually expanding due to dark energy and contracting due to gravity, both of which may be due to quantum fluctuations. Additional dimensions may explain locality and non locality (spooky action at a distance). For a philosophical look at space this link is interesting https://www.scienceandnonduality.com/david-bohm-implicate-order-and-holomovement/ The holographic universe projects 3D space onto a 2D membrane or sheet which could be regarded as a 4th dimension connecting all points in space. This additional dimension might explain non locality, but then it might not exist either

true

You are confusing me with someone else, I have generally restricted myself to asking questions. I have checked the answers before asking another question on that subject. I have started a number of threads on related subjects from Quantum entanglement, to Black Holes. Mordred has a good thread on what space is, which seeded some lines of thought in my skull, the space antecedence thread was also interesting and I asked some questions which I thought were not a hijack according to section 2 of the forum rules.

I was asking questions on the physics forum ref space but was informed I was hijacking and told to stop it, so i have I will have another google for the actual paper. I have no beliefs just questions, if you recall any of the threads I started I have no fixed belief, but do have opinions. Cross post Edit: here is the paper http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/845/1/012003/pdf My opinion is that all the different theories whether they be relativity, QLG, String theory, QFT, Dark energy or quantum foam inflow etc etc all give some insight into how space works

And that is why I thought I would try the philosophy forum to see if anyone had any coherent thoughts they were willing to share, that may be a little outside the other forums. This thread is an offshoot from the space antecedence thread I was told to stop asking questions on. What I was asking about there was space, which does not exist without quantum fluctuations. I noted space time only existed after the big bang allowed it to unfold, additional dimensions may also exist (see string theory) . The expansion of space is happening gravity can be viewed as the contraction of space or an inflow of dark energy. I understand QLG allows for the expansion and contraction of space, and BB from Black holes. The following popped up on a google search when I was checking out dimreeprs statement Space has a membrane which has surface tension, the membrane of space time can take on many fundamental shapes such as waves, corpuscles, menisci, vortices, agglomerates, and foams. It is suggested that these basic shapes can be arranged in atoms, molecules, and matter. In other words, everything in the universe may be manufactured from the fabric/membrane of spacetime itself. Matter and energy are connected in a virtual membrane at the interface of observed time. The above may be due to quantum foam effects/dark energy effects, both of which are a result of quantum fluctuations on the membrane of space

Dont apologise I was partly taking the piss, and being facile also for mild amusement like yourself and strange? Thanks for the response I know no one knows how many actual dimensions there may be. I had asked under speculations to get people to speculate and it hadnt worked so it amused me to try the philosophy section for an answer. I know string theory has additional dimensions, as does everyone else on this forum, but it is still just a theory. A photon or something travelling at light speed does not perceive time or distance, yet it is observed taking a finite time at light speed to move across 3 D space. Under entanglement and none locality information is transmitted without going through space in excess of light speed, as if the separated points do not perceive delays due to distance. If two seperated points in 3D space are connected via another dimension where space or time do not exist information could be transmitted directly without delay, two particles separated by space may behave as one. The concept of a membrane of space with possible extra dimensions and having some form of surface tension as in fluid dynamics is intriguing. If space has a surface tension, the membrane of spacetime could take on many fundamental shapes such as waves, corpuscles, menisci, vortices, and foams. If these basic shapes can be arranged in atoms, molecules, and matter. In other words, everything in the universe may be manufactured from the fabric/membrane of spacetime itself. String theory requires a membrane with strings which are in effect representations of waves vortices and foams etc. Its the same concept. I was just trying to start a conversation, but clearly have failed yet again. Bugger Does the above explanation partly explain where I was headed with the thread.

Could you elaborate on the scientific explanation of the above, or explain philosophically how you arrive at your claim.