interested

Am I right in thinking the original matter in the universe, appeared out of an expanding space, then coalesced into stars and possibly black holes before exploding more dense material throughout the universe.? The original matter which formed after the expansion of space was hydrogen and helium and a little bit of lithium this is all made up of subatomic particles, which would have been entangled pairs. These entangled pairs would consist of both virtual particles and real particles, quarks, fermions. The energy of these entangled pairs MAY have been greater than the none-entangled equivalent pair of particles. (Swanson) Energy can not be destroyed, what happens to the additional energy of a entangled particle pair when entanglement is broken? Does this result in low energy photons or radiation.? theoretical axioms perhaps? what energy level do axioms have? Virtual particles are known to behave more like real particles the longer they survive, can virtual particles in the stillness of space at or near 2.75K become real particles under any circumstance, perhaps through some Feynman type interaction. Am I right in thinking a wormhole is more like the absence of space between two particles, and a black hole is a very dense object, which creates sufficient gravitational distortion to bend light back into it. ie a blackhole has nothing to do with quantum entanglement or theoretical wormholes. Can entangled particles appear at the opposite side of the universe, or do they need to appear adjacent to each other.?

I know space is on average 2.5k which is as near as damn it to 0k What have you just been discussing with Itoero and Handy andy if it was not the production of matter from the vacuum. I will go and check everything, I have read, I suspect you are being argumentative and I do not argue especially with experts.

I have been googling all sorts of stuff to try and clarify for myself what the answer to my original questions were. I know the big bang was not at 0 K, I was referring to the original matter of the universe, before a big bang. Handy andy posted a video link on page 2 ref a pair of black holes that are exploding and suggested that black holes could be the source of the Big Bang, Strange suggested no such theories existed. Theories suggesting black holes explode do exist and avoid the concept of singularities. The following links are interesting ref Holographic origins of the big bang https://www.universetoday.com/104863/goodbye-big-bang-hello-hyper-black-hole-a-new-theory-on-universes-creation/ https://arxiv.org/pdf/1309.1487.pdf There are dozens of other links along these lines, one could spend a life time reading them all.

Am I right in thinking the original matter in the universe, may have appeared out of the vacuum, then coalesced into a big black hole before exploding in a big bang.?

I think we covered the star trek thing on an earlier post. The clocks may not be moving, but are separated, to separate them you have to move them apart. No one has addressed my question ref ehow far apart objects can be to entangle them, except by your teleportation idea, which is not the same as entanglement of atomic clocks. I will see what I can throw up using google, I may have better luck, thanks any way. Itoeros post was incredibly more detailed than your post. You may both be wrong. I am not going to get involved in an argument so will revert to google and check out both your claims.

I think that the sudden realization that singularities from big bangs and monster black holes seem to contradict each other are not exactly related to this thread http://www.indiana.edu/~fluid/contradictions-between-the-black-hole-and-the-big-bang-theories-and-the-structure-of-the-universe/ There are lots of links when you start digging. I think I will stick with the basics and let someone else worry about possible contradictions in theories.

During a teleportation error there is no chance of two captain kirks existing at the same time with opposite behaviour. On the link above Handy andy posted it refers to multiple quantum clocks being entangled to create an even more accurate clock. I understood once particles are entangled they could be moved apart and remain entangled. I don't understand your last paragraph, are you saying they would stay entangled and tick at the same rate or stop being entangled and tick at different rates Now I don't know what to think.

I understand according to some the Big Bang is possibly as a result of a Black hole exploding at some critical mass level rather than from a singularity. https://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743 this is just one of many links I found, it kind of explains why black holes are thought to exist at the centre of galaxies. But it still leaves the question where did the original mass in the Black hole come from. Mass has been observed being ejected from black holes at almost light speed, along with gamma rays. Has mass stable particles ever been created in the lab by breaking quantum entanglement, or is that purely theoretical?

Can you explain a little more ref teleportation? If the information is sent at light speed from points A to B, is the information destroyed at point A on teleportation? Also what would happen if two atomic clocks were entangled and one was flown around the world, whilst the other was at a fixed location? Thanks Handy aandy and Itoero for the links BUT Does this effect how matter is created in the early universe, or the Big bang theory?

Is it agreed my previous summary was correct except perhaps a little speculative ref worm holes and information transferring through them. I think I agree The "spooky action" and information transfer should be kept as two separate subjects so as not to confuse the subject any further. The link posted earlier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement covers most of my questions BUT NOT ALL! Focusing on quantum entanglement of particles what is the maximum range this can be achieved over. Do the particles need to be in close proximity for it this to occur, or can they be separated by large distances.? Does entanglement work better at near or absolute zero? How stable or large does a particle have to be, ie can virtual particles be entangled or does the particle need to be stable before it can be entangled, ? Do virtual particles last longer at absolute zero enabling them to be entangled for a short time. The speculation came from one of the earlier links posted, but does make sense of the mathematics and what is happening.

Thanks for the explanations. To summarise what I think may have been written above. Entangled particles are thought to transmit information via a wormhole from points A to B separated by a distance x as a wave function. This information because it travels through a worm hole is close to instantaneous. The information can only be viewed at light speed, and therefore does not violate special relativity. The information is destroyed or decoheres once viewed and so is secure. Until the information is viewed it is a paradox ie until you look at the result you don't know the answer. Quantum keys are used to make data more secure, anyone with the key can access the data, anyone without the key can not and can be detected trying to gain access. Is the above right or wrong? How are particles entangled? Can particles separated by a distance be entangled ie what is the upper limit on separation of particles to entangle them? Does anyone have a good link on how entanglement is done and what the limits are on separation of particles.? Do entangled particles behave the same way as entangled photons used in computing? According to research by Prof. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, the lower limit to the speed associated with entanglement dynamics – or "spooky action at a distance" – is at least 10,000 times faster than light."

Can you expand on the above statements? Are you now contradicting your earlier post Quantum computers using entanglement would seem to be pointless if no information can be stored, retrieved or manipulated.

This link ref electron entanglement might be of interest on this thread https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150701082831.htm

Thanks Strange for the clarification and Itoero for the link ref ER. A worm hole connecting particle A to B, or the two particles even though they are seperated are the same particle, is almost religious. I see why Einstein said it was spooky action at a distance. How many degrees of movement do entangled particles have, is it just rotational, or are there more degrees of freedom.

Thanks Handy andy BUT What does "China leads the way, maybe!" mean, do you or anyone else doubt the Chinese claims. I posted on the expanding space thread ref the speed of action in quantum entanglement and may have misunderstood the references in the links above using the word "instantaneous" After a little use of google I came up with the following. "Quantum entanglement, one of the odder aspects of quantum theory, links the properties of particles even when they are separated by large distances. When a property of one of a pair of entangled particles is measured, the other "immediately" settles down into a state compatible with that measurement. So how fast is "immediately"? According to research by Prof. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, the lower limit to the speed associated with entanglement dynamics – or "spooky action at a distance" – is at least 10,000 times faster than light." http://newatlas.com/quantum-entanglement-speed-10000-faster-light/26587/ Is the above statement from the above link accurate? Could the speed of data transmission be between instant and 10,000 x faster than c? Is the jury still out? Also is it likely that another dimension exists that the data is transmitted through, which connects the quantum entangled particles?

No. Perhaps this should be followed up under the quantum entanglement thread I started, so as not to detract from this thread.

OK simplifying a model is only as good as the information that goes into it. Had Einstein observed dark matter he would have included it in his model. Dark matter has been inferred to exist, but not actually detected. This suggests the model is so good it predicts something that we cant detect, that exists or that the model is wrong in that it predicts something that does not exist. Quantum mechanics gives extremely reliable results, and is undeniably very accurate, it is however based on probability. Einstein himself I think stated "god does not play dice with the universe", again he may well have been mathematically wrong.

Previously you stated under the Quantum entanglement ? thread I started information was transmitted instantly Qoute "There is no evidence of information being transferred. Whatever effect is happening, it is instantaneous (as far as we can tell), but there is no way to exploit this to communicate with anyone. Think of this example: you flip a coin. As soon as you see what one side it (heads) you instantly know what the other side is (tails). Does that require the transfer of information? Now imagine the coin is 1 light-second wide. Entanglement lasts until some interaction removes it, called decoherence. Anything that measures the state that's entangled removes it. " Can you explain the discrepancy in your answer ref the speed information is transmitted or are you just making it up as you go along.

Can I disagree? Math demonstrates the effect, it does not demonstrate a truism. Given a certain set of circumstances a mathematical theory can predict an outcome. If the theory is reasonably accurate, it gives a correct or close approximation to the outcome. The theory need not take into account the actual cause. God created everything is a theory, it is likely not based on the truth, but many argue it to be the case. All math demonstrates is a theory that can explain a certain outcome, it does not definitely take into account all the effects. Probability is used where all the variables cant be taken into account or are not fully understood. Quantum mechanics is assumed to give accurate predictions, but does not describe the underlying cause. Quantum Mechanics assumes an absolute time, it does not allow for time dilation in relativity. Which concept of time is correct. Work on unifying quantum theory and relativity is underway, the theories can't be assumed to be complete until they are either unified or one is shown to be an approximation and replace the other. Quantum Entanglement transmits information instantly between points A and B, giving the appearance of exceeding light speed. The route taken for the information may not be via normal space, ie the space may not exist between points A and B in another dimension. Likewise in the Quantum world particles or information moves from A to B instantly, does this mean the space the particles or information existed in moved or the distance between where they started and finished suddenly disappeared. "Very generally" current understanding puts forward models based on mathematical probability. The mathematical probability explains the outcome not the effect. Space is grainy at the quantum level, and may not operate exactly according to current mathematical models, included in the standard model today. I disagree with your statement ref mathematical truth, am I correct?

Thankyou for the clarification and answers. I did a quick search for clarification, and found these links for anyone interested. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3811785.stm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence Thanks

Are you serious about teleportation?. The links were interesting, I read bits on Wikipedia before, but don't think I found that link. I have some questions remaining, Is information transmitted instantly beyond the speed of light between the entangled particles? is the distance between entangled particles not the same in the quantum world. once particles are entangled how long can it last.? Mordreds thread was interesting, but a bit over my head in places, especially towards the end. Thankyou for the links.

Can any one explain how quantum entanglement works, and the limits of what is achievable through quantum entanglement.