To expand on this, to detect a Q particle you have to “see” it somehow. How do we observe it? By shooting it with something (photon or some other particle) and observing the effect or letting it hit another particle causing a change. The problem is there is no way to see it without changing or destroying it. For that reason, we can only guess at where Q particles are is by using some probabilistic function (maximum likelihood function I would guess.) So, in order to know the spin of a Q particle we have to kill it in the process.
An analogy, suppose we can only see things by throwing a baseball at them, but everything we throw the baseball at is the same size or smaller then the baseball and so we can hear the collisions but whatever we hit with the ball is either knocked away, or destroyed in the process.

Has anyone here heard of this experiemntal result?

ny way thanx for the wonderful article

As for the act of measuring the spin of electrons actually changing them, I think this is a bit misleading. What they mean is that these values are constantly changing and can not be predicted (yet). Whatever it was before you observed it is different than what it is after, so in a sense, the act of observing it caused the change.

How does the entanglement principle work with the electro magnetic principles?

If the human mind works on this, and the atoms and things that I have no idea about are basically electric and magnetic then surely that copying say the electro-magnetic wave length of the body healing itself could be copied?
Or using the same thing to copy weightlessness would then bombard the cells of something heavy changing the properties making it lighter.

If so then it can be intensified and used as a magic wand to make the cells healthier. Almost like super-oxygenising the blood.

Then the ability to copy, transmit and duplicate could influence the whole spectrum of life as we know it?

Just a thought?

quantum computation became real, and led to quantum cryptography, what interest the DoD of course was that the code could not be broken, aside from where yall discuss the method of the message, which you can find in Science News or Scientific Amercan. in order to decipher the code, crack it,you would necessarily change its quantum properties. just by looking at it. that is what has brought such great interest to the field.
there’s lots more in what is for me the Most exciting history of the 20th century. called The Age Of Entanglement, by Louisa Guilder, i couldnt put it down. she brings teh great characters to life, Bohr, Einstein, Schrodinger, Pauli, Dirac, Ehrenfeld, the very creme of the brilliant generation of physicists. and she reconstructs their debates in which you watch how these great minds wrestgled with the nature of material structure.
I do highly recommend it, and you will see how it will bring everyone here to the same excitin g page,

In Dr. Stephen Hawking’s lecture The Beginning of Time he stated that at the germinal moment “…all matter in the universe would have been on top of itself.” He followed by saying that contemplating what proceeded the Big Bang as having “no observational consequence.”

In our thought laboratory we can postulate that space and time began with the Big Bang. One model for this beginning would be that simplest of geometric elements known as the dimensionless point. Even though this point is beyond our understanding by observation or application of physical laws it doesn’t necessarily follow that it would play no role in the essential nature of matter.

A third nature of matter may simply be that all matter remains superimposed within this point and the observation of this nature is likewise dependent on how we go about it.

Instantaneous interaction over distance may be explained by eliminating the distance, thereby making instantaneous effects less spooky.

1) “The link of entanglement works instantaneously at any distance.”(I am fine with this) “….as faster than light messages travel backwards in time” (Sorry but I cannot agree with this) ‘Instant’ does not mean ‘before’ so where does the travelling back in time come from? (Which cannot be done in my opinion)

2)”Because looking at a quantum particle changes it” How does it ‘change’ it? Surely you only get a measurement or reading of its current state?

Your input will be most interesting!
Steve S From Johannesburg.

The spending by one will immediately affect the resources available to the other.

If a universal system existed that tracked these transactions, then immediate knowledge of available funds does not require direct communication with the other party… just a PIN and access to the universal system.

So what’s to say that the quantum world doesn’t rely on a 4th dimension to communicate. It would certainly makes communication between multiple entanglements a lot easier.

“Transmission” of information and “our ability to interpret” that information are not the same. Entangled particles do transmit information faster than light. Just because we did not/could not/can not know the initial status information and so can’t use that information, we can’t imply that the information did not get transferred. That is like saying, since I can not understand a Chinese talking, when some body talks to me in Chinese, the information was not transferred. Yes, information was transferred but was not interpreted.

I find it ridiculous that some of the logic being extended to explain quantum phenomena is not logical at all. And think of it, this lack of logic is defended under the garb of weird quantum phenomena! I don’t think this approach can solve any problems.