I posted a question similar to this a while back (there's a picture of my snowbound Blazer that goes with this post; taken when I was still working, and living, in Spokane WA, for Health Services Northwest -- we got hit with a record five feet for the month of Dec. that year). Not articulated nearly as well as it should have been, no doubt, but it was basically the suggestion for a thought experiment: trying to see if entanglement would hold over the relative time dilation between a stationary observer, and a craft accelerated to a high percentage of the speed of light (assuming you could get an entangled pair separated so that one was with the observer, and the other with the accelerated craft), and allow the transfer of information one way or the other, across that dilation, in something approximating the same instant, for both (the very problem of which is stated in the article linked to here).
One might think that this would suggest it would hold, but I'm certainly not the one to make that bold of a statement with any kind of certainty, but it has to at least be plenty suggestive of a decent probability for this to be so.
This, unfortunately, gets me to thinking even more on why we don't question the ethics of very high energy, directed particle collision, instrumentality as the main means for the exploration of matter as a basic entity in Cosmology, and physics in general (something else I have also posted more than once on).
You need only think upon it for a few minutes to start wondering about the kinds of entanglement that might be created in such specifically, choice driven, investigative techniques, and the supposedly objectively observed explosion of resultant, reactionary debris. Entanglements that would not be in place were an equivalent particle accelerated by already existing galactic phenomenon; to equivalent energies. And if there are such, lets call it sorta contaminated, entaglened elements in your results, what then transfers, information wise, over who knows how many complicated variations, of a mix of both space and time, if you insist on continuing with the practice?
Always remember one of the most basic tenets of complex systems: Small inputs can have large, overall effects.
Of course you also have to remember the other thing with me. I am a biased dreamer. And I also shoot from the hip with at least some excess. Take everything I proclaim with a healthy dose of skepticism.
See Also:
[Post Note: And can there ever be any kind of true, simultaneity of an arbitrary moment? One that spans space and time? J.V.]
[Post Note: And can there ever be any kind of true, simultaneity of an arbitrary moment? One that spans space and time? J.V.]
GONE IN .6 SECONDS
How Long Is A Moment, Exactly?
The physics, neuroscience, linguistics, and philosophy behind a little bit of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment