steevey

How exactly did they notice that there should be unseen matter specifically, and why?

Have they ever tried colliding two entangled particles and seeing if anything happens? If there needs to be some weird dimensional thing for anything, it's entanglement.

I'm not saying they are entangled "because" of spins, I'm saying the properties of their individual spins are dependent on each other once they get entangled. Couldn't they easily prove that distance doesn't effect entanglement this way by simply getting some really good timers, which count at the same time, separating them and two entangled particles, and measure them only exactly when a person on one end changes the spin on purpose, or something like that? So your saying that "because" they measure the entanglement, that it can't happen faster than light, which doesn't make sense. So, why not just, they can see for a fact that entanglement happens instantaneously, but once they do see it, the system becomes disentangled after that? So you have two electrons which are entangled, rather than photons. Both have spins which are now co-dependent on each other. You separate them, then you measure one, and find that it's spin up. So your thinking that the other must be spin down, but according to all the information your given to me, if the two electrons are no longer entangled, then at the very moment the scientists measure the spins, both the spins have a chance of being the same, but as far as I know, that's never been the case.

So, just be clear: When you have two particles that are entangled, and a property like the spin changes, the spin of the article does't respond instantaneously to have the opposite spin?

So the unseen matter has no kinetic energy, which means its absolute zero in a PLASMA experiment? If I remember correctly, nothing can reach absolute zero, only infinitely close to it.

There's no reason for energy which can normally always be accurately measured to all of a sudden disappear only when they do particle colliding. Chances are, there just just another unknown particle which they don't know how to detect, which get's released from the particle collision.

At this level, size matters a lot. If a particle is bigger, it has a less probable places that it can show up, or occupies a smaller amount of probable space. If a particle is smaller, like an electron, it can occupy grater areas of probability, or more space. Is what I said, I don't think its exactly right, but I know that it explains why an electron occupies probable spaces which are much greater than that of the nuclei's.

What's wrong with them being inside quarks? Well I think it would violate Planck Time, which is the shortest amount of time that matters because its the time it takes from light to travel from one proton in a nucleus to the next, but other than that, I don't see why. Since quarks have a color charge, there has to be some way the forces are carried throughout them.

It's almost as if he posted this wrong intentionally for some reason...

Why would so many sources and actual scientists get this wrong? Even the discovery channel said something similar to this. I've looked it up in books, youtube, google, and they all say this instantaneous thing works in a similar way to how I described it. But then, how do the scientists know that the spin states keep changing during entanglement, if when you measure it, the properties become determined? Also what about the mass thing? Was I right about how mass and probability correspond at a quantum level?

So are saying completely confidently, that it's scientific fact that when the properties of one entangled particle changes, that the properties of the other particle don't change instantaneously, which means information somehow automatically travels through all solid matter and space to get to the exact point of the other particle responding to it at the speed of light or below? Cause when I refer to the instantaneousness in entangled particles, I'm not referring to when they measure it during when the experiment is happening. I'm referring to when they have timers which count the same, get some entangled particles, separate them by over 100km, and find out that the exact time they tried to change the property of one, that the other changed instantly. I get what your saying with the measurement thing, and how it would be mistaken for instantaneousness, but then how could you "keep" changing the properties, because otherwise in your analogy with the coin, you'd have to measure one of the particles. Your saying they know what the spins of entangled particles are at one specific point, because after that point, the entanglement collapses and the properties become determined. I'm talking about multiple times, a continuous bases of one entanglement, that the spin is changing and the other particle reacts.

When you say "carried off into other dimensions", that doesn't make sense because all the dimensions would exist simultaneously, the only problem is we just can't see them ourselves if they are there.

Is there any observable proof or any measurable proof of 10 dimensions in any way other than purely theoretical mathematics? What I heard, is that in 3 dimensional space, light grows dimmer by the square of the distance. In 4 dimensional space, light grows dimmer by the third power of the distance. In 10 dimensional space however, light grows dimmer by the fourth power of the distance, explaining why stars far a way look like dots. But otherwise, that's the most concrete thing I know of.

The way gravity is described in quantum mechanics, is that it's composed of a particle called a Gage Boson. Gage bosons are the particles which are responsible for forces being carried from particle to particle. Mathematically, they are there, however, they appear out of the nothingness of space, usually for brief moments then disappear. The Gage Bosons with mass are the ones that disappear, and the higher the mass of a Gage Boson, the briefer the existence. However, there's another catch. Mathematically, the Gage Bosons with mass, "snap back" to the particle they were emitted from, but can also get exchanged between other particles. To explain how gravity's strength changes, it's been determined that if Gage Bosons exist, Gravities Boson has no mass, which allows it to exist indefinitely. However, as it spreads out, it gets weaker as there is less and less of a concentration of Gage Bosons. These Bosons don't "snap back" to the parent particle that emitted them. The reason Gravity's Boson is so weak, is because it's composed of a smaller amount of some type of energy than there is mass of the Boson for a force like the electromagnetic force. At least that's what I've heard.

Well since all elementary particles have a wave function, and the universe was just a single point, it had a wave function. If you apply the wave function to that single point of the universe, you essentially get a map of all the probable universes. So where are they you might ask? They are around somewhere, but we don't have the capability to see them. They are like ghosts, but if you were in any other universe, then this universe your in now would be a ghost to that universe as well. This is because they are also still technically entangled as well.

So this is a long topic, but it started out someone I know asking how something could react instantaneously, and my friend said there's nothing we currently know of that does that. So then, I introduced entanglement theory, saying that when particles are also waves of existence and the atomic and subatomic level, and when they come into close enough proximity with each other, their wave functions become entangled in a way that the properties of one is dependent on the other. I also stated that it's been proven that distance does not cause the wave functions of either particle to collapse, so long as the entangled particles are separated carefully. I went on to say that because of this entanglement thing, scientist are beginning to develop it for a number of technologies, such as computers, cryptography, and communications in the future. My friend went on to say that this entanglement system doesn't allow the transmission of "information", which is what the light barrier is about, but I said that scientists could use this for information because instead of using photons, they could use electrons or protons in their spin states in specific patterns which to form specific letters, much like Morse code (forgot where I learned about that). In explaining this, I said that scientists can figure out the spins of electrons and other particles without destroying the entanglement. This is what we're mainly having a bigger debate about, because I said that they couldn't know what the spins are randomly, they've done experiments where two particles are entangled, but they can somehow know what the spin is, there has to be some way they know what the spin is without destroying entanglement. My friend then brought up wave function collapse which I already knew about, saying that if the system is measured in any way, the particles disentangle. I kept saying there has to be some way for them to know what the spin is. I brought up the double slit experiment, because that proves you can observe the effects of the wave function, but not the wave function itself as its happening. But, he stated that quantum teleportation requires a classical communications channel to "transmit" any information from point A to point B. I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that this type of communication would be useful because it would allow for nearly unlimited bandwith, but it certainly doesn't allow for faster-than-light communications. Here's what I said around the same time " Two particles, usually photons since it's easier to deal with as their initial velocity carries them apart, have a wave function. A wave function is part of the particle, so every elementary particle we think of, and light, is both a particle and a wave. The wave function is a wave of existence itself. However, like all waves, is has a frequency. The places where a particle is most likely to show up, are the polar coordinates where the wave crest is maximum/minimum in the wave function. And where the wave hardly moves at all (on a graph or sound analyzer thing I forgot the name of), a particle usually doesn't show up. At this level, size matters a lot. If a particle is bigger, it has a less probable places that it can show up, or occupies a smaller amount of probable space. If a particle is smaller, like an electron, it can occupy grater areas of probability, or more space. When two particles come close enough to each other, their wave functions interact. They become entangled, to the point where the properties of some are dependent on the other. When you do something to one, the other reacts instantly. You can set up an experiment to emit electrons in pairs, so that their wave functions are entangled. Both have spins flip-flopping up and down, and they both respond to each other's spin. However, when an observer measures any particular particle, the system disentangles instantly. Scientists say this wave function collapses. However, when scientists shot single electrons in their double slit experiment, the electrons still had a wave function, and occasionally passed through both slits of a metal board at the end, and left markings on the back panel, proving you can see indirects effects of entanglement without destroying entanglement. It's only when they decided to measure the electrons themselves before they had any impact that their wave functions collapse. " To which he said "This is incorrect. The spins aren't "flip-flopping", they exist as a superposistion of all possible quantumn states, which we tend to think of as a probability distribution (something that can't be directly observed). Wave function collapse isn't some unfortunate side effect of entanglement that can be avoided, it's actually a phenomenon that allows quantumn teleportation to work in the first place. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. The fact is that classical information can not (as of yet, and likely very far into the future) be transmitted at faster than light speeds. Particles don't have size. All particles are point particles in quantum mechanics. The associated wave function has a size of a sort, in that you can find the boundary surface within which the particle is found X% of the time, and call that the "size" of the wavefunction, but the X is arbitrary. Entanglement has nothing to do with them coming "close enough". It has to do them interacting in a way such that conservation laws impose requirements on the total state. For example, when a free neutron decays into a proton, electron, and electron antineutrino, because of conservation of angular momentum, the spins of the electron and the neutrino have to be the same (they have to total to 1 because the W boson they came from had 1 spin). Their spins are entangled. When you measure the spin of one of them, the wavefunction for the other collapses to the same singlet state." What are either of us wrong and right about? If scientists can figure out the spin of a particle in a quantum mechanical system of entangled particles, how do they do it without destroying the entanglement? What's the deal with "classical" information not being carried through entanglement instantly, but properties are, as my friends state?