Bond777

Could squeezed microwave states be somehow useful for wireless energy or data transfer? 1601.06697.pdf (arxiv.org)

Rather an attempt of farther research and investigation.

In pure vacuum EM waves can travel indefinite distance. But they cannot tunnel between two remotely located points without attenuation and will spread to all the sides. Not only between two points like quantum entanglement does.

Is there some explanation why non-locality is purely quantum phenomena and there could never be a classical analogy? For example, something related to EM waves?

Could we make some solid quantum sponge then?

What if we have droplets of a regular cryogenic liquid which are embedded in a thing layers of a quantum fluid like a bubbles? If some quantum fluids won't take any heat, shouldn't they serve as an ultimate and absolute heat insulators? And prevent to take any heat to the liquids they embed within themselves?

Possibly some additives could convert regular cryogenic liquids into liquids with quantum properties?

There is such thing as a "quantum liquids". Quantum fluid - Wikipedia Some claim even at room temperature. room temperature quantum liquid - Google Search

Which principle may permit to store cryogenic liquids such as methane, hydrogen or nitrogen for almost indefinitely long time in liquid state without energy losses? For example there is such an effect: Could we create a dynamic localization in cryogenic liquids somehow?

At the beginning yes. Someone who increases the automation to a certain level faster than the competitors gains a temporary advantage by lowering the good's prices before the competitors do it and has a chance to gain the larger market share. However once all the competitors are forced to increase automation to the same level, they got a chance to win their lost market share back again and the total profits of all the manufacturers combined may fall below the level which preceded the start of the automation race.

Competition forces business owners to increase automation in order to increase productivity and lower prices. But lower prices doesn't necessarily mean higher profits. En Passant » Can robots create profit?

But this theory, in my understanding, claims that more sales is NOT = more profits. Even contrary, if sales are increased due to automation rather than human labor intensification. There are claims that the average US companies profit rate steadily fell during the second half of 20-th century. Mostly due to competition which forced companies to lower prices and increase automation. However in 2000-s the profits started to grow again as US companies increased manufacturing outsourcing to the countries with less automation and cheaper labor force. The US rate of profit 1948-2015 – Michael Roberts Blog (wordpress.com) However there also could be some attempts to hide profits for tax evasion. Thus according to this theory the most profitable enterprise is the most labor intensive and least automated.

Here is no "economics" section on this forum and therefore I've decided to post it in "politics". There are some speculative claims that robots and machines cannot create profit to their owner by themselves. Only human labor can. An owner cannot exploit his robots and machines and make them create more values than they cost themselves + their maintenance. Could someone explain it in details and for dummies why is it so if it is true? Tendency of the rate of profit to fall - Wikipedia Does it mean, for example, that if I would an owner of a fully automated factory with zero workers it would be able to bring zero profit to me unless I would do some labor myself related to this factory and then my earnings will be no more than my own labor output and my personal labor value?

My question was rather a philosophical one. The feelings and emotions are about subjective experience. But is subjective experience really necessary for a creature to react to surrounding environment in order to survive in it?

Even fish and insects?

If not, then how the Darvinists explain evolution from instincts to emotions? If advanced A. I. will be developed someday, will it need the feelings for survival and self-protection necessarily?

Why feelings and emotions are better for survival than instincts (like in lower animals)?

What are the "secret classical correlations"? [quant-ph/0107082] A classical analogue of entanglement (arxiv.org)

It depends on De Broglie wavelength, which could be quite large in radio waves.

Theoretically, EM waves could travel from transmitter to receiver by means of quantum tunneling, avoiding any attenuation in the environment. We need to have some long distance correlation between the both. Another possibility is to use magnetic induction or resonance between the two circuits. But again in order to make it work it efficiently over long distances we need to have magnetic field lines closed between the two over long distances. This effect suppose to resemble self-focusing magnetic lens.

What correlations at distance could exist between transmitter and receiver?

0112019.pdf (arxiv.org)

Could we imagine the way in which two remote antennas (transmitter and receiver) could be classically entangled? Could someone shed more light on the classical entanglement? For example, one related to electromagnetic circuits?

Unless in one of the universes some genetic mutation will happen to you which will prevent aging or elixir of youth will be invented or you will become an immortal cyborg.

Obviously. I didn't insist it has to be entanglement only.