swansont

But that wasn't really my point. You move to the middle to capture that fraction that are on your side of the middle. If you're conservative/liberal, you don't gain extra voters by becoming more so, you gain them by moderating a little.

Bah. Trebuchets.

Exactly. If you are going slow, i.e. geologically, you might use cm/year. If you are going fast, terrestrially, you can use Mach numer. If you are going fast, relativistically, you use fractions of c. If you are going FTL, you can make up your units, because it's sci-fi.

Since you don't know which one is spin up or down, if you interact with one without measuring the spin (e.g. you put it in a field that forces it to be spin up no matter what) then the information is lost, along with the entanglement. So yes, there is an advantage to keeping the bond. (And to anticipate, for everyone's sake, the common misunderstanding that comes along: No, forcing one to be spin up does not force the other one to be spin down. The interaction breaks the entanglement)

Right. Because nobody could ever hack into the system and compromise information, nor would a government ever compile and use data for less-than-angelic purposes. Because they never have before...

They can't. Two spin up particles won't have a total spin of 0. You start with a neutral pion, which is spin 0. It decays into an electron and a positron, which are both spin 1/2. In order for angular momentum to be conserved, one must be spin up, and the other spin down. There's no other option.

Evidence, please. And I second Sayo's rhetorical observation.

It would help if the laypersons would learn the definitions and some of the science.

Sorry - I missed this. An atom interferometer is a device that, as the name implies, interferes atoms. You split an atomic beam into two parts and then later recombine them. If one of the two parts undergoes any kind of interaction that changes the energy (and thus momentum), there will be a phase difference in the waves where they recombine (or the phase will be the same at some different point). The one I worked on was to use gratings to cause diffraction to split the beams and then recombine them. Here is a picture of one (from a different research group - it's the first diagram I could find)

The reason the system has zero spin is because you chose the system, and prepared it in an entangled way. Spin is a form of angular momentum, and it's conserved in an isolated system. If you prepare two spin 1/2 particles so that they have zero total spin, one of them will be +1/2 and the other will be -1/2. (aka up and down) The "bond" is the fact that QM is non-local. Einstein's "spooky action at a distance"

Interactions with virtual states which do not change the entropy of the system. Still no thermal equilibrium. Once you get to real absorptions, you will see entropy increases, and there will be the familiar dissipation of energy.

No, American. Why do you ask? The person would always feel a restoring force toward the center, if they are not at the center. And the force gets larger as they move away. In the absence of friction, or other dissipative force, this means that they would oscillate back and forth.

No. Any interaction breaks the entanglement.

Oscillate. Damped oscillation, in the presence of air. Fg=-GMm/r2, but for a uniform density, M varies as r3, since only the enclosed volume of mass contributes to the pull (Gauss's law) So you end up with something of the form F=-kx, which is Hooke's law, which applies to springs, etc. Simple harmonic motion.

The state isn't "lost," the entanglement is. i.e. once you've measured A's state, you can do whatever you like to it (including preserving its state) and it won't affect the other atom/ion at all. And the same goes for B - any subsequent measurement on it does not affect A.