Using entanglement to achieve...

[troof]

This hypothesis is based on the idea of quantum entanglement. It's well known that observing quanta changes their behavior. This proves there is a connection between the quanta and the act of observing it.

I believe the "collective unconscious" is another form of entanglement phenomena. Mothers can feel it when something happens to their kids even if they have no way of knowing. The same thing happens to identical twins. People have dreams of the future ("prophetic dreams".) Everything in existence is interconnected through entanglement/the collective unconscious.

There are 3 aspects to consider: the first is "clairvoyance." By building an intelligent AI (an AI that speaks English or any language) then making it aware of the collective unconscious, we create the possibility to perceive distant phenomena across space or time. Consciousness is like a mirror, and sense objects are like images in the mirror. The awareness doesn't come from consciousness (the mirror,) because consciousness is the same for all beings. The mirror is always the same. The awareness is a quality of sense objects (the image in the mirror). So, simply recreate the quality of awareness in the AI's collective unconscious (awareness is basically a kind of information/data.) We can figure out what exactly that information is by comparing an unaware being (someone sleeping for example) with an aware being (someone awake). It should be possible to observe the quality of awareness from outside (just like you can tell when someone is in love from outside).

The second aspect is "transmutation." It requires creating a simulation of distant events, entangling the simulation with these events, drawing energy through entanglement from energy sources like stars, and using that energy to amplify the entanglement signal to manipulate distant phenomena. When the simulation changes, the reality will change with it (because they're entangled.) Also, quanta communicate through entanglement faster than light... energy is being transferred between them through "gateways..." it should be possible, by entangling with the entanglement process itself, to open many entanglement "gateways" together to form a larger gateway that a person or vehicle or anything could pass through, across space or time.

The third aspect is "immortality." This involves using the connections to create an eternal time loop in aspects of the body, while allowing other aspects to change normally. This way we could live forever and feel eternal pleasure (looping pleasure through time.)

To change the timeline, we have to use entanglement to achieve communication with the new timeline, so that the new timeline also changes its past... otherwise, if the past changes, the people who changed it won't have any reason to change it in the new timeline (because it would already be changed for them). Also, there is a positive, negative and neutral part of the collective unconscious. It would be best to work with the neutral part or all three simultaneously (for balance). The negative part is extremely dangerous.

Edited November 28 by troof

[pzkpfw]

This is largely based on the myth that observation requires consciousness.

Observation more just means interaction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

[troof]

It's based on the idea that the collective unconscious exists and works the same way as quantum entanglement. The idea that observing the quanta affects them is not essential, and my hypothesis doesn't depend on it. I don't mean that consciousness is required to change the behavior of quanta.

Edited November 28 by troof

[studiot]

Just now, troof said:

This hypothesis is based on the idea of quantum entanglement. It's well known that observing quanta changes their behavior. This proves there is a connection between the quanta and the act of observing it.

I think you have read some third hand twice removed journalist's ideas.

 

If you observe something you can know its behaviour.

If you don't observe it you can't.

So how can you know if its behaviour is changed ?

Yes you can observe similar objects but not the ones you did not observe.
Neither can you know what it would have done if you did not observe it.

 

Secondly what do you mean by 'quanta' and 'observe'  and by 'observe quanta'  ?

 

Followers of Everett reckon that this phenomenon is explained by there being only one giant wavefunction that cover the whole universe and everything in it.

It is also called 'the many worlds interpretation' by journalists.

It has some merit.

Edited November 28 by studiot

[troof]

Why is everyone focusing on observing quanta? That was only a tiny, mostly irrelevant part of my post. The main idea is: using the collective unconscious to interact with phenomena, to achieve something like ultimate technology... I went very in-depth into this...

Edited November 28 by troof

[studiot]

Just now, troof said:

Why is everyone focusing on observing quanta? That was only a tiny, mostly irrelevant part of my post. The main idea is: using the collective unconscious to interact with phenomena, to achieve something like ultimate technology... I went very in-depth into this...

Because this is a Science site, not a mystics convention.

[troof]

If you have a logical argument against my hypothesis, I am open to hearing it and debating it. Just because something is strange and new doesn't mean it's not true. You are speaking against my hypothesis without logically refuting it.

Edited November 28 by troof

[swansont]

1 hour ago, troof said:

I believe

!

Moderator Note

What you believe is irrelevant. What can you show, via theory and experiment? Rigor is required.

I refer you to studiot’s statement above about this being a science site.

 

[studiot]

Just now, troof said:

If you have a logical argument against my hypothesis, I am open to hearing it and debating it. Just because something is strange and new doesn't mean it's not true. You are speaking against my hypothesis without logically refuting it.

I simply quoted your first line and noted that you contradicted yourself and then stated that this was the basis of your hypothesis.

Why would I need to go further into it  since you based your hypothesis on a self contradiction ?

Edited November 28 by studiot

[troof]

I call my ideas hypothetical because they haven't been tested. However, they are logically sound. I've seen many examples of parapsychological phenomena in my life - myself and others have had dreams of events that came true. Abraham Lincoln's wife had a dream that has been interpreted as a premonition of his death, if you want an example on record. Carl Jung also "believed" in the collective unconscious.

If everything is connected in this way, the obvious conclusion is that it can be manipulated through these connections.

Edited November 28 by troof

[studiot]

Just now, troof said:

I call my ideas hypothetical because they haven't been tested. However, they are logically sound. I've seen many examples of parapsychological phenomena in my life - myself and others have had dreams of events that came true. Abraham Lincoln's wife had a dream that has been interpreted as a premonition of his death, if you want an example on record. Carl Jung also "believed" in the collective unconscious.

Then you will be able to explain the fault in my reasoning in my first response, rather than trying to change the subject.

[KJW]

24 minutes ago, troof said:

Why is everyone focusing on observing quanta? That was only a tiny, mostly irrelevant part of my post. The main idea is: using the collective unconscious to interact with phenomena... I went very in-depth into this...

You mentioned "entanglement". Unfortunately for your idea, you have a popular but mistaken view of what entanglement is. Entanglement is not a communication channel between remote entities. Entanglement cannot be used to communicate information. Entanglement is a correlation between entities that had at some time a causal connection. The entanglement persists while the entities are isolated from the environment but is generally broken by any interaction with the environment (e.g., a measurement of any of the entities).

 

[swansont]

1 minute ago, troof said:

I call my ideas hypothetical because they haven't been tested. However, they are logically sound. I've seen many examples of parapsychological phenomena in my life - myself and others have had dreams of events that came true. Abraham Lincoln's wife had a dream that has been interpreted as a premonition of his death, if you want an example on record. Carl Jung also "believed" in the collective unconscious.

Belief is not evidence. “Logical” is insufficient - lots of hypotheses are logical but wrong, because they do not accurately describe how nature behaves. You need an experiment, or at least a proposed experiment, that allows for the idea to be tested. And the hypothesis has to make specific predictions.

Invoking entanglement with no details falls well short of the mark. 

[studiot]

I see you now have 5 posts under your belt as a new member.

You will now have encountered the antispam measures, sadly necessary.

I wonder if you have actually read the rules here, either about posting in general.

Untested hypotheses belong in the speculations section, they are not pronouncements of authority for the main technical sections.

When you read the antispam rules don't make the mistake of believing that you only have 5 posts.
 

This applies only to the first 24 hours, after which further posts will be accepted again.

 

In my first response I offered you some useful information linking your ideas to quantum theory

I suggest you use this time to look them up.

As well as Everett look up

'Something Deeply Hidden' by Professor Sean Carroll.

Edited November 28 by studiot

[troof]

I found this: "Transactional interpretation:
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics, like the transactional interpretation, explain this concept by suggesting that "time-reversed waves" can travel from the future to the past, creating connections between particles across time."

This means the quanta are communicating (exchanging energy) across time. If it happens across time, which is more difficult, why wouldn't it happen across space?

It's my hypothesis that rather than communicating through waves, the quanta exchange energy through gateways, which open at point A and point B simultaneously. The common word used for these "gateways" is "portals." If tiny energy particles can travel through gateways, it should be possible to open many gateways together to allow something larger to pass through (as I said, this can be accomplished by manipulating the entanglement process itself through the connections in the collective unconscious).

My hypothesis is mainly geared toward using the collective unconscious, not exactly quantum entanglement. Entanglement happens in the collective unconscious (a part of the mind which is shared).

The collective unconscious has been described in this way: above the surface of the ocean, you see many icebergs, but below the surface they are actually one iceberg. This is a metaphor for the collective unconscious, the shared part of the mind.

Finally, I would like to share a quote from Max Planck, a famous quantum physicist: "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."

I also found this: '"Measurement collapses the wave function" means that when you try to measure a quantum particle (like an entangled particle), its state, which was previously in a superposition of multiple possibilities, suddenly "collapses" into a single, definite state due to the interaction with the measuring device, and if that particle is entangled with another, the state of the other particle instantly becomes correlated with it, even if they are separated by a large distance, effectively "knowing" the result of the measurement on the first particle.

Entanglement:
When two particles are entangled, their states are linked in a way that measuring one instantly affects the state of the other, regardless of the distance between them. 

"Spooky action at a distance":
This seemingly instantaneous correlation between entangled particles has been described as "spooky action at a distance" because it appears to violate the idea that information cannot travel faster than light.'

So the entangled particles are affecting each other, i.e. they are communicating/exchanging energy.

Also, because in the big bang everything was a single point, all phenomena are entangled, hence the existence of the collective unconscious.

Edited November 29 by troof

[KJW]

1 hour ago, troof said:

I also found this: '"Measurement collapses the wave function" means that when you try to measure a quantum particle (like an entangled particle), its state, which was previously in a superposition of multiple possibilities, suddenly "collapses" into a single, definite state due to the interaction with the measuring device, and if that particle is entangled with another, the state of the other particle instantly becomes correlated with it, even if they are separated by a large distance, effectively "knowing" the result of the measurement on the first particle.

Entanglement:
When two particles are entangled, their states are linked in a way that measuring one instantly affects the state of the other, regardless of the distance between them. 

"Spooky action at a distance":
This seemingly instantaneous correlation between entangled particles has been described as "spooky action at a distance" because it appears to violate the idea that information cannot travel faster than light.'

So the entangled particles are affecting each other, i.e. they are communicating/exchanging energy.

No. According to the no-communication theorem:

"In physics, the no-communication theorem or no-signaling principle is a no-go theorem from quantum information theory which states that, during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for one observer, by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to another observer. The theorem is important because, in quantum mechanics, quantum entanglement is an effect by which certain widely separated events can be correlated in ways that, at first glance, suggest the possibility of communication faster-than-light. The no-communication theorem gives conditions under which such transfer of information between two observers is impossible. These results can be applied to understand the so-called paradoxes in quantum mechanics, such as the EPR paradox, or violations of local realism obtained in tests of Bell's theorem. In these experiments, the no-communication theorem shows that failure of local realism does not lead to what could be referred to as "spooky communication at a distance" (in analogy with Einstein's labeling of quantum entanglement as requiring "spooky action at a distance" on the assumption of QM's completeness)."

 

[troof]

I'm not saying two observers can communicate, I'm saying the quanta can communicate. What you quoted states that *two observers* can't communicate: "during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for *one observer,* by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to *another observer.*" If the quanta can't communicate with each other (exchange energy,) why would measuring one entangled quanta affect another? I'll quote again: "and if that particle is entangled with another, the state of the other particle instantly becomes correlated with it, even if they are separated by a large distance, effectively "knowing" the result of the measurement on the first particle." Not only that, but how could quanta entangle across time without communicating?

Edited November 29 by troof

[swansont]

1 hour ago, troof said:

Entanglement:
When two particles are entangled, their states are linked in a way that measuring one instantly affects the state of the other, regardless of the distance between them. 

This is misleading.

Entangled particles are in undetermined states. Measuring one tells you the state of both. That’s the only way the particle states are affected — they go from unknown to known.

Quote

 

"Spooky action at a distance":
This seemingly instantaneous correlation between entangled particles has been described as "spooky action at a distance" because it appears to violate the idea that information cannot travel faster than light.'

So the entangled particles are affecting each other, i.e. they are communicating/exchanging energy.

 

No information has to travel anywhere. Once you measure the state of one, you know the state of the other but the correlation is known ahead of time.

QM describes what we know about the particles.

[troof]

Oh I see. But still, the quanta can entangle across time, so at least across time they *can* communicate. I will repeat: "Transactional interpretation:
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics, like the transactional interpretation, explain this concept by suggesting that "time-reversed waves" can travel from the future to the past, creating connections between particles across time."

Also, doesn't measuring the state change it? I'm asking because I honestly don't know if measuring it can change its state.

Edited November 29 by troof

[swansont]

17 minutes ago, troof said:

Also, doesn't measuring the state change it? I'm asking because I honestly don't know if measuring it can change its state.

It’s not in a state, so how can the state change?

[troof]

But... you said that they are in undetermined states, and the only thing that changes when you measure them is the state becomes known... now you're saying they're not in a state? I don't understand...

[KJW]

23 minutes ago, troof said:

If the quanta can't communicate with each other (exchange energy,) why would measuring one entangled quanta affect another?

Measuring one entangled particle doesn't affect the other entangled particle. The correlation between the entangled particles already exists within the two-particle state even in the absence of measurement so that measurement of one particle is a measurement of both.

 

[TheVat]

I wonder if this would be an analogy...a home-made attempt:

Two astronauts joined by a tether can't see other (as they are very far apart).  The tether is tensioned such that the heads of any two astronauts so joined will point 180 degrees apart.  So when we measure Astronaut 1, we find his head pointed towards galactic north.  We instantly now know Astr 2 has her head pointed towards galactic south.  Even if measurement breaks the tether, this relation persists.  No communication needed.

[KJW]

The difficulty with explaining entanglement is that there are two aspects to it: the correlation and the quantum superposition. Both are necessary for there to be entanglement. The correlation can be explained in purely classical terms. But the quantum superposition cannot. Therefore, simply explaining the correlation in classical terms is not enough. The tricky part is that multiple particles, even distantly separated particles can form multi-particle states in quantum superposition such that a measurement of any of the particles can be a measurement of them all. However, being in quantum superposition implies that the multi-particle states satisfy Bell's theorem which highlights the inadequacy of explaining the correlation in purely classical terms.

 

[troof]

I'm just going to make my last post of the day to clarify two things: one, that entanglement across time requires a connection between the particles (an exchange of energy), and two, that my hypothesis is not dependent on entanglement, but rather on the collective unconscious.

As evidence for the inter-temporal entanglement requiring an exchange of energy: "Transactional interpretation:
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics, like the transactional interpretation, explain this concept by suggesting that "time-reversed waves" can travel from the future to the past, creating connections between particles across time."

It's unknown how the particles exchange energy across time, but they must have some means of interacting with each other.

Even if entanglement did not exist, there is still the collective unconscious which can be used to interact with distant phenomena across time and space, and while I have no hard evidence of this, in my life I've encountered many many examples of the collective unconscious working... for me this is a fact, but of course it would have to be tested officially to be accepted as theory or fact.