MJ kihara

Is wave function collapse real?

Is wave function collapse a real phenomenon?

Perhaps entanglement happens prior to the 'destruction' of the photon and prior to emission of the photon when the atom undergoes relaxation.......''anyway from my thinking,'the other concept' a photon causing excitation is not destroyed,and it still exists in photon zone within the electron,whereby it's then emitted when the election is deexicited.... sorry for being off conventional"

On the issue of knowing and issue of interaction on close proximity....to know you have to make measurements.... making measurements means coming into closer proximity to the quantum particle being measured for accuracy of your measurements to improve,closer to the extent uncertainties takes over...when the signal from test particle come back to you so that you know,entanglement is destroyed..if the signal you used for measurements doesn't come back and stick to the quantum particle being measured then entanglement is not destroyed. I think for quantum particle or quantum particles,any kind of interaction at closing proximity,it involves entanglement.....by knowing the state of entanglement you are destroying the existing interaction of the system and the system is no longer in the entangled form that you knew...iow i think AT CLOSE PROXIMITY for quantum particle/s you can't separate interaction and entanglement (interaction without entanglement is impossible).....detection/knowing, you are destroying the interaction since you have to get something out of the interaction to be the signal your getting to make you know.

Meaning that you can have an interaction of quantum particles(electron),but as long as you know the individual spin of the electron(A&B) prior to interaction entanglement of their spin won't take place? Iow interaction of quantum particle in close proximity without entanglement is possible.

Knowing the spin of A and B and bringing A and B into close proximity which one takes precedence for entanglement to occur?

Let's say AB were an entangled pair of electrons,A with spin up and B with spin down .....your taking them apart,your measurements flips spin of A... what will happen to the spin of B? Why does for entanglement to occur,it require close proximity interaction? This sound like a conspiracy...is it a must?

The device is the one detecting change of state.... entanglement in this case induces wave function synchronization of particle A and B. When measurements are done to particle A it's wave function collapse forcing particle B to change state,then the device back on Earth detects this change of state... Whichever the state of particle A and B are initially does not matter, in this case,what matter is any change of state induced by measurements affects the entangled system (A and B) no matter how part they are as long as they are entangled...no need to compare...what is needed is a signal no matter how trivial it is. The device is fictional because of our current civilization technological know how.

A device capable of detecting wave function of an entangled state...when quantum particle A is entangled to quantum particle B then these particles are separated held into different device,one device is carried by space ship and another left behind on Earth ...the one left behind holding particle B let's say initiates a reaction when it detects change of state of particle B of course caused by wave function collapse...once the crew reaches proxima centauri they take their device holding particle A interfere with it, the device left on Earth detect change of state of B then initiates a reaction,that way a signal has been sent...which happens instantly.

Radio device involves sending photons while entanglement communication device involves utilization of entanglement to communicate... which signal arrive first?

Let's have hypothetical ship moving at c,carrying entanglement communication device and a radio communication device...after reaching proxima centauri approximately 4.2 light year away...the crew decide to communicate with people back on Earth using light signal(e.g radio device) then using entanglement device...which device will pass the communication first?

How do you get to entangle particles? The act of entangling and probability function which come first? Can entangled system used for communication?

I totally agree with you caring about physics,that doesn't mean am wrong..you are free to say what you think.

I respect you views,Nothing else I can do to convince you otherwise.

If you could not get my explanation on moon receding away from Earth after I referred you back to my answer...I thing it's difficult for you to get my thinking on this. Be contended with that... don't be bothered by my thinking.

🤯 GR mathematics part of what i have been outlining partially on this concept...linearised gravity... https://www.google.com/url?q=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linearized_gravity&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwi5ys_77q3_AhWrVqQEHSgCARAQFnoECAMQAg&usg=AOvVaw096VvVCGNwhJPrAQ9b42ne

👀😎 😴🤐🤐

The red marks/ticks won't change what is the reality....17 February 1600 Giordano Bruno burnt for going against the establishment of his time.... always happen when people forget history,and become overconfident of themselves that they can not stomach challenges... nothing new.

If that is the notion...good luck while you try to look for answers about issues of the Universe like baryogenesis...hope you won't take forever.

You posted the answer...as I said I hope those diagrams will defend themselves for a long time.. I think am done with what I was to discuss concerning the thread.

Pliz don't misrepresent and manipulate the concept...just to wash it under.....I understand the importance of mathematics,it's an indisputable fact...that doesn't mean any kind of reasoning is useless. Tell me about your understanding of E=mc^2 so that I see how my understanding is wrong.

A good example if one were to plot the probability function for the quantum uncertainty principle. One wouldn't get a bunch of wavy sinusoidal lines. It would look more like a probability cloud around a vacuum potential baseline Back to my point.... Leave the emoji and consciousness....the diagram is having CLOUD like layer....it just not waves....I think nothing I can write here will make sense because people around are defending their perceptions fiercely.... anyway those clouds have a lot to say.

It is seems I don't know what to say...what am doing is not some kind of a movy or a video...look at this.... Am NOT wrong...you refuting those diagrams you ARE dead wrong...that single diagram....its just a wonderful summary...of how many physics mathematical formulars? Just count. You want to make me think am hallucinating...am not ... simplicity make science accessible to the masses just like a simple formular E=mc^2.

Remember those five diagrams....if not the explanation...I hope they will defend themselves for a long time to come...they are easier to visualize,when writing pages and pages of mathematics becomes hectic...let's have the spirit of making science accessible and universal to the crackpots,laymen and strawmen and to the majority without degrees in physics.

Those diagrams I didn't dream about them I used simple mathematics....up quark charge +2/3 and down quark charge -1/3 I tried to come up with a diagramatical way of understanding such issue...it worked that way....I wonder what is wrong with using simple mathematics over complicated math to understand the working of nature. All said and done...as you have already said. Those simple math,simple diagrams and simple concepts helps me understand the way nature work...at least I sleep knowing am not in the wilderness of the unknown...the universe, am part of it...no issue of being born and no issue of dying...it's just the way it is. Its unfortunate to some, nature doesn't work the way they feel it should or would want to force it to work.