Entanglement, The Big Bang and Essence

[Soulewolf]

“Quantum entanglement, also called the quantum non-local connection, is a property of the quantum mechanical state of a system containing two or more objects, where the objects that make up the system are linked in a way such that one cannot adequately describe the quantum state of a constituent of the system without full mention of its counterparts, even if the individual objects are spatially separated.”

The curious nature of a Beta Borium Borate crystal includes the ability to split a particle into two particles of a lesser frequency simply by passing through the crystal. The resulting pair of particles which are created together are said to be Entangled.

What this means is that no matter the distance between the particles, if you stimulate one of the particles, the other one will respond. Say if you spin a particle one way, the other particle will spin the opposite (i think, either that or the same way) way regardless if they are right next to each other or on the opposite sides of the universe.

The Big Bang is a theory in which all matter in the universe was created simultaneously through some explosion or another.

Logically this would mean that all matter in the universe is “entangled”. That at some innermost essence all things in the universe are indeed one thing. This idea is reflected in many philosophical and religious beliefs such as Buddhism, Shamanism and Taoism.

Though the quiddity of these particles are different, the haecceity is the same.

What i want to discuss in this thread are the philosophical ramifications of entanglement between two particles, as well as the spiritual and philosophical ramifications of all matter being essentially one thing.

What are your ideas on the subject?

 

[JohnDamian]

Such an interdependance would be equal to stating that there is a real unity between all matter and energy in the universe; even though they are formally distinct. It would be wrong to state that they have the same “haecceity”; as the haecceity individuates not by matter; form is properly assimilative; wheras matter is properly distinctive;- because in lacking form matter that does have form in advance is distinguished from it; and so one composite is distinguished from another in haecceity in the assimilative.

A quick few Questions about “entanglement”;

If one of two particles entangled is destroyed; is the other?

Is one particle prior to the other; and the other posterior; or are they identical in form and emergence?

Is one particle contingent upon the other in an efficient sense; or an accidental sense?

As a quick formulation I cannot see how all matter(and energy) being really identical has any effect upon our understanding of the world. According to the laws of conservation of energy there is no reason to believe that entanglement changes anything.

Souls are not claimed to be material; ie-ergo no problems there.

 

[PatrickSebast]

I never really saw much of a philosophical meaning to entanglement, but then again that might just be the engineer in me getting too excited about the impact these things could have on computer and communications technology.

 

[Anselm33]

Such an interdependance would be equal to stating that there is a real unity between all matter and energy in the universe; even though they are formally distinct. It would be wrong to state that they have the same “haecceity”; as the haecceity individuates not by matter; form is properly assimilative; wheras matter is properly distinctive;- because in lacking form matter that does have form in advance is distinguished from it; and so one composite is distinguished from another in haecceity in the assimilative.

I’m tempted to agree with you on that, but I’m still in a quandary as to what constitutes a soul.

 

[Soulewolf]

Two particles are produced or set up in a superposed, entangled state.

Hmm i dont know about this one. As far as i’ve read about the quantum eraser experiment, the two particles can be measured without collapsing their entangled state. They aren’t superposed. In fact this is a very important part of the quantum eraser.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment

on decoherance, maybe you could go into it a bit more in depth. As far as i read on wiki

“Decoherence does not generate actual wave function collapse. It only provides an explanation for the appearance of wavefunction collapse.”

 

[Anselm33]

Hmm i dont know about this one. As far as i’ve read about the quantum eraser experiment, the two particles can be measured without collapsing their entangled state. They aren’t superposed. In fact this is a very important part of the quantum eraser.

Fundamentals of quantum mechanics are very clear about this–see von Neumann, Wigner and others. Once the act of measurement has been completed, i.e. the system has been observed, the mixed state collapses. What the article in Wikipedia doesn’t make clear is that even though the photon has hit a detector, the final measurement has not been made, i.e. you don’t have the option of first seeing a non-interference pattern, then changing the path and seeing an interference pattern (or conversely). The quantum eraser experiments are ingenious versions of the delayed choice experiment first proposed by John Wheeler. You can think of this in terms of a double-slit diffraction experiment: if both slits are open, you will see an interference pattern; if one slit is closed you will see the classical pattern. Now if you go back and close one slit after the particle has gone through, you will see only the classical pattern, i.e. you’ve gone backwards in time? to influence the behavior of the particle. The delayed choice experiment, in the general form proposed by Wheeler, has been done by Aspect and confirms the quantum mechanical predictions. (Wheeler interestingly proposed using starlight and a galactic gravitational lens, so that one would go back in time several million years).

The way decoherence is supposed to work, according to my understanding, is that perturbations from the environment (if it’s at an appreciable temperature, say 100 K or so, with several energy states thermally populated) introduce random phase factors in the component states, which tend to average out so that only one of the possible states is observed. Instead of getting a superposition, i.e. entangled states, you then get an ensemble, i.e a mixture of states.
that is to say, you convert |A(soft)>|B(hard)> + |A(hard)>|B(soft)> to an ensemble consisting of |A(soft)> |B(hard)> and (not entangled)
|A(hard)> |B(soft)> in equal numbers, a mixture of states.
What is also interesting is that you can supposedly prevent this decoherence by the so-called quantum Zeno effect, i.e. hitting the system repeatedly in short intervals with measurement perturbations (see the Wikipedia article which explains it pretty well). Stapp has argued that the quantum Zeno effect is the way quantum mechanics can act in consciousness.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Instead of getting a superposition, i.e. entangled states, you then get an ensemble, i.e a mixture of states.
that is to say, you convert |A(soft)>|B(hard)> + |A(hard)>|B(soft)> to an ensemble consisting of |A(soft)> |B(hard)> and (not entangled)
|A(hard)> |B(soft)> in equal numbers, a mixture of states.

I think my understanding of decoherence is different. Here is what I think/thought:

First, the mathematics. Consider the superposition state |s> given by:

|s> = 1/sqrt(2) * ( |A(soft)>|B(hard)> + |A(hard)>|B(soft)> )

Now, suppose that you can only perform experiments on B. Let M be a measurement on B. Then the overall measurement on |s> is given by the tensor product (I x M), where I is the identity matrix acting on A. Then, calculating <s|(I x M)|s> gives:

1/sqrt(2) * 1/sqrt(2) * ( ( <A(soft)|A(soft)> * <B(hard)|M|B(hard)> ) + ( <A(hard)|A(hard> * <B(soft)|M|B(soft)> ) )

= 1/2 * ( <B(hard)|M|B(hard)> + <B(soft)|M|B(soft)> )

This value is equal to the value of applying measurement M on the mixture of states 50% of |B(hard)> and 50% of |B(soft)>.

In English, this says that an entangled superposition, when viewed locally, is experimentally equivalent to a mixture (and not a superposition) of the corresponding substates.

This view of decoherence solves the problem of Schrodinger’s cat. From real world experience, we expect the result of the potentially lethal experiment to be a mixture (and not a superposition) of the |live> and |dead> states, but the linearity of the Schrodinger equation predicts a superposition of states, where 1/sqrt(2) * (|live> + |dead>) is neither live nor dead but some weird ghostly superposition state. However, when the interaction with the environment (i.e., the decoherence) is also modeled, what we really end up with is the linear superposition 1/sqrt(2) * (|environment1>|live> + |environment2>|dead>), which the mathematical derivation above shows is experimentally equivalent to the mixture of |live> and |dead> as far as just the cat is concerned, which corresponds to our real world intuition.

Anyway, this is just what I thought decoherence was.

 

[Anselm33]

I think my understanding of decoherence is different. Here is what I think/thought:

 

[Just_Lurking]

so thanks for your comment… and I’d appreciate any other criticisms.

Thanks for your response and for the link!

 

[Soulewolf]

Fundamentals of quantum mechanics are very clear about this–see von Neumann, Wigner and others. Once the act of measurement has been completed, i.e. the system has been observed, the mixed state collapses. What the article in Wikipedia doesn’t make clear is that even though the photon has hit a detector, the final measurement has not been made, i.e. you don’t have the option of first seeing a non-interference pattern, then changing the path and seeing an interference pattern (or conversely). The quantum eraser experiments are ingenious versions of the delayed choice experiment first proposed by John Wheeler. You can think of this in terms of a double-slit diffraction experiment: if both slits are open, you will see an interference pattern; if one slit is closed you will see the classical pattern. Now if you go back and close one slit after the particle has gone through, you will see only the classical pattern, i.e. you’ve gone backwards in time? to influence the behavior of the particle. The delayed choice experiment, in the general form proposed by Wheeler, has been done by Aspect and confirms the quantum mechanical predictions. (Wheeler interestingly proposed using starlight and a galactic gravitational lens, so that one would go back in time several million years).

The way decoherence is supposed to work, according to my understanding, is that perturbations from the environment (if it’s at an appreciable temperature, say 100 K or so, with several energy states thermally populated) introduce random phase factors in the component states, which tend to average out so that only one of the possible states is observed. Instead of getting a superposition, i.e. entangled states, you then get an ensemble, i.e a mixture of states.
that is to say, you convert |A(soft)>|B(hard)> + |A(hard)>|B(soft)> to an ensemble consisting of |A(soft)> |B(hard)> and (not entangled)
|A(hard)> |B(soft)> in equal numbers, a mixture of states.
What is also interesting is that you can supposedly prevent this decoherence by the so-called quantum Zeno effect, i.e. hitting the system repeatedly in short intervals with measurement perturbations (see the Wikipedia article which explains it pretty well). Stapp has argued that the quantum Zeno effect is the way quantum mechanics can act in consciousness.

Fascinating! thanks i’mma have to finish hawking’s new book then check this stuff out in greater depth.