Jim. I get what you're saying. I think we really are going round in a circle.
We all agree that the second particle is affected instantly, no matter how far away.
And that it's affected by our own action of measuring the first particle.
So my action on Earth can instantly affect an entangled particle a million light years away.
So you are saying that even though I've affected that particle, and fixed it's spin, there is NO new information in that particle. Not readable information. I've accepted that bit. But no new information at all.
This is from the main Entanglement page :
Wikipedia wrote:
It thus appears that one particle of an entangled pair "knows" what measurement has been performed on the other, and with what outcome, even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances.
It looks like someone should be volunteering to edit the wording of the page. XC could get it right. He knows everything.
When I said that the effect is happening faster than the speed of light, I made it clear that I wasn't proposing something could TRAVEL faster than light. But this HAPPENS faster than light.
The distinction is,
take the example I keep using. Two entangled particles a million light years apart.
I am with one of them, and I want to affect the other.
If I shine light at the second particle, it takes a million years to reach it.
If I measure the first one, it takes an instant to fix the spin of the other.
It's faster than light, in the sense that it's faster than light COULD HAVE reached the second particle.
It's not faster than light, in the sense of physical travel through space time from A to B quicker than c.
Also, when I made the comment that this stuff could bring up problems for relativity, it caused great explosions of wind, but it's not just me :
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... elativity/
As far as the subject being closed for discussion or speculation goes, perhaps it's worth reading the wiki page on superluminal communication.
Then look up Anton Zeilinger, if you are impressed by qualifications. And then explain why wiki says this :
Wikipedia wrote:
Birgit Dopfer, a student of Anton Zeilinger's, has performed an experiment which seems to make possible superluminar communication through an unexpected collective behaviour of two beams of entangled photons, one of which passes through a double-slit, utilising the creation of a distance interference pattern as bit 0 and the lack of a distance interference pattern as bit 1 (or vice versa), without any other classical channel.[4][7] Since it is a collective and probabilistic phenomenon, no quantum information about the single particles is cloned and, accordingly, the no cloning theorem remains inviolate. Physicist John G. Cramer at the University of Washington is attempting to replicate Dopfer's experiment and demonstrate whether or not it can produce superluminal communication.[8][9][10][11]
So of course the subject is settled. Why are these people even bothering?
The poor things haven't had the benefit of XC's gob shite . Someone should tell them XC thinks they are wasting their time. Maybe if they asked nicely, XC could put them right. It's a shame for them to waste their valuable time, when a bit of vocal excrement from XC could save them time and embarrassment.