While I was falling asleep last night I was thinking of quantum entanglement... and I got to thinking about how we could take advantage of the phenomena.

We all know of the practical applications like instant communication, computing, teleportation, lag free gaming, etc...

But can we leverage the phenomena, to say, change particle properties in a zero G environment while affecting the entangled particle on Earth?
We wouldn't need to affect the whole of the object just a number of the atoms embed in the object.
Eg: Joe has a hoverboard on Earth with x number of atoms with off Earth entangled particles.
The a force is applied to the off Earth atoms and instantly the same happens to Joe's hoverboard.

I know the phenomena is 4D (space/time) independent, so is this theoretically possible?

I came up with this idea from watching UFO videos... I thought maybe the light discs that seems so prevalent are in reality only the energy signatures of entangled particles.

What y'all reckon?

i reckon , can you hook me up to score from your dealer

barn said...

Oh dear..

That was your best ever post barn

(edit) The ultimate irony was in Billy's last sentence.

Can't find it on the choob but now I'm really curious to know what Herman Cain said.

Love the fact that he managed to keep a straight face while delivering the roasting.

^^hahaha, epic response to an epic question.. For those that don't know, it's from Billy Madison, during the Academic Decathlon..

Anyway, I think Feynman said it best,

"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."

The more macho Physicists don't care that it is imposible to grasp, just so long as the Calculations work!!.. Either way, it'll be a while yet before we are applying any of these concepts to hover boards... But there is Quantum mechanics in our computers, that's cool enough for me..

FlySurfer said...


But can we leverage the phenomena, to say, change particle properties in a zero G environment while affecting the entangled particle on Earth?
We wouldn't need to affect the whole of the object just a number of the atoms embed in the object.
Eg: Joe has a hoverboard on Earth with x number of atoms with off Earth entangled particles.
The a force is applied to the off Earth atoms and instantly the same happens to Joe's hoverboard.

Why not just apply the force to the hoverboard without going to all that fn trouble?

evlPanda said...

FlySurfer said...


But can we leverage the phenomena, to say, change particle properties in a zero G environment while affecting the entangled particle on Earth?
We wouldn't need to affect the whole of the object just a number of the atoms embed in the object.
Eg: Joe has a hoverboard on Earth with x number of atoms with off Earth entangled particles.
The a force is applied to the off Earth atoms and instantly the same happens to Joe's hoverboard.

Why not just apply the force to the hoverboard without going to all that fn trouble?

Ah, I see what you're trying to say.

Yeah Parallel Space Propulsion utilising quantum entanglement is a pretty, um, original idea. I am guessing you are saying you'll have a 1G advantage because the entangled object in space will be weightless... or will it be entangled with the object on earth that does have weight? Have you thought this through, apart from how grossly inefficient it is?

Besides:

FlySurfer said...
Suppose we wanted to get a really big object in to space.
We could construct it with entangled atoms at load bearing places and then apply the force to the other entangled atom.

But doesn't entanglement work both ways? You apply the force to the atoms in space only to find they have a 1G force acting on them. Or would it be half? I Have no ****ing idea.

Besides the energy expended to entangle the atoms is probably going to more that you'll save. And we have levers now.

FlySurfer said...


We all know of the practical applications like instant communication, computing, teleportation, lag free gaming, etc...

My understanding (admittedly vague) was that you couldn't actually use entanglement to get instant communication, due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

So let's say you have two entangled particles, on opposite sides of the world. Each particle can be in one of two states. Before you look at them, they are in a superposition of states.
So let's say Alice measures her particle, to get its state. Bob's particle will then instantly collapse into that same state. But Bob has no way of knowing when this measurement happens, because he can't look at it for fear of collapsing the state of his particle...

All Bob can know is that Alice's particle is in the same state as his particle.

It is spooky action at a distance, but it's not instant communication. That's against the law

Again this is only my understanding of it, which could very well be wrong...

nebbian said...
My understanding (admittedly vague) was that you couldn't actually use entanglement to get instant communication, due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

So let's say you have two entangled particles, on opposite sides of the world. Each particle can be in one of two states. Before you look at them, they are in a superposition of states.
So let's say Alice measures her particle, to get its state. Bob's particle will then instantly collapse into that same state. But Bob has no way of knowing when this measurement happens, because he can't look at it for fear of collapsing the state of his particle...

All Bob can know is that Alice's particle is in the same state as his particle.

It is spooky action at a distance, but it's not instant communication. That's against the law

Again this is only my understanding of it, which could very well be wrong...

Yes, measuring the state will collapse the wave, but you must remember we are talking about millions of IOPS to be of any use and a computer will be taking care of the passive/active state.

The Uncertainty Principle refers to measuring the state simultaneously... so you can't know it's state and not affect it at the same time == super secure communication.
And it works in Mass Effect 2

On the original subject; now also imagine that we have a spacecraft infused with entangled particles would it be possible to reverse the wave collapse and thus turn the particles in the spacecraft back in to a wave (but still trapped within the craft) and send the entangled particles down a stream of photons... thus achieving light speed?
Because of 0 drag in space, we wouldn't even need that many particles.

**Ring ring**..

Flysurfer - Hello, Military?

Military - Yes?

Flysurfer - I have an idea..now imagine that we have a spacecraft infused with entangled particles would it be possible to reverse the wave collapse and thus turn the particles in the spacecraft back in to a wave (but still trapped within the craft) and send the entangled particles down a stream of photons... thus achieving light speed?
Because of 0 drag in space, we wouldn't even need that many particles.

FlySurfer said...

nebbian said...
My understanding (admittedly vague) was that you couldn't actually use entanglement to get instant communication, due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

So let's say you have two entangled particles, on opposite sides of the world. Each particle can be in one of two states. Before you look at them, they are in a superposition of states.
So let's say Alice measures her particle, to get its state. Bob's particle will then instantly collapse into that same state. But Bob has no way of knowing when this measurement happens, because he can't look at it for fear of collapsing the state of his particle...

All Bob can know is that Alice's particle is in the same state as his particle.

It is spooky action at a distance, but it's not instant communication. That's against the law

Again this is only my understanding of it, which could very well be wrong...

Yes, measuring the state will collapse the wave, but you must remember we are talking about millions of IOPS to be of any use and a computer will be taking care of the passive/active state.

The Uncertainty Principle refers to measuring the state simultaneously... so you can't know it's state and not affect it at the same time == super secure communication.
And it works in Mass Effect 2

On the original subject; now also imagine that we have a spacecraft infused with entangled particles would it be possible to reverse the wave collapse and thus turn the particles in the spacecraft back in to a wave (but still trapped within the craft) and send the entangled particles down a stream of photons... thus achieving light speed?
Because of 0 drag in space, we wouldn't even need that many particles.

i think i want flysurfer to design my next car and house !

CERN claim faster than light speed neutrinos.


The distance from the detector in Italy to the source in Geneva is about 730 km. The travel time at the speed of light is about 2.43 milliseconds, and the neutrinos appear to have outraced that speed by 60 nanoseconds. If true, that means they were traveling just a scosh faster than light, by about 1 part in 40,000. The neutrinos from SN1987A traveled so far that had they been moving that much faster than light, they would've arrived here almost four years before the light did. However, we saw the light from the supernova at roughly the same time as the neutrinos (actually the light did get here later, but it takes a little while for the explosion to eat its way out of the star's core to its surface, and that delay completely accounts for the lag seen).

But I wouldn't use that argument too strongly; perhaps this experiment creates neutrinos in a different way, or the neutrinos from this new experiment have different energies than ones created in the cores of supernovae (a good bet). Still, it's enough to make me even more skeptical of this FTL claim.

www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8&ion=1&nord=1&gws_rd=ssl

FlySurfer said...

CERN claim faster than light speed neutrinos.


The distance from the detector in Italy to the source in Geneva is ...

I think the clue is right there

Probably a case of daylight saving in Switzerland and not in Italy.