Do photon entanglements make it possible to transmit information slower than the speed of light?

[Abhirao456]

 

 

[This](https://youtu.be/9l6VPpDublg) is a lecture by Persinger where he postulates that photon entanglements and the Earth's magnetic field can facilitate telepathy. (See from 20:00 to 30:00)

 

Links to the study he cited:

http://neurosciarchive.byethost12.c...ween-physically-and-sensory-isolated-pair.pdf

 

 

My questions for you:-

 

• If you are ready to smack this as woo and nonsense, then could you provide some counter arguements?

 

•Since teleportation of photons has finally been achieved in 2017, do these point towards indirect proof for his postulating?

 

• Finally is the no communication theorem/no cloning theorem a proper arguement towards this ?

 

TL:DR I just want to know if photons are entangled then can they transfer information.... I do know the no communication theorem states that this isn't possible in cases of faster than light, but if quantum teleportation takes place via a classical channel, does this hold the guy's arguement true?

 

Thank you for your time

 

 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Abhirao456 said:

http://neurosciarchive.byethost12.c...ween-physically-and-sensory-isolated-pair.pdf

That’s not a valid link, and you need to summarize it here.

 

Quote

If you are ready to smack this as woo and nonsense, then could you provide some counter arguements?

Telepathy is woo and nonsense. You have to establish it’s real, independent of the mechanism. Entanglement and teleportation are real quantum effects, but it smacks of snake oil here; an attempt to legitimize the pseudoscience by tying it to a shiny bit of science that’s not really well-understood by most people, especially outside of physics 

 

To answer the question in the title: yes. Photons can transmit information slower than c, so entangled photons can do this.

[Phi for All]

On 10/24/2021 at 10:26 PM, Abhirao456 said:

• If you are ready to smack this as woo and nonsense, then could you provide some counter arguements?

Do you think telepathy would be beneficial to human survival? Most people I've asked this of say absolutely, it would be a phenomenal benefit. So why don't we see more of it over time, the way evolution works? Why can't we find a single individual who consistently tests significantly higher than average for these abilities? Something that provides such a benefit is bound to make a person more successful and so those traits would be selected for with each generation. We don't see it, so the reasoned conclusion is that what we think of as telepathy isn't possible.

[TheVat]

https://gfycat.com/brightthirdfrillneckedlizard

 

[johnsankey]

Entanglement does not transfer information if you stick to observables rather than mathematics.

Details here: url deleted

 

[swansont]

10 hours ago, johnsankey said:

Entanglement does not transfer information if you stick to observables rather than mathematics.

Details here: 

 

!

Moderator Note

Our rules on advertising discourage advertising one's own site, and encourage discussion taking place here.

IOW, "details here" isn't good enough; you need to have included some discussion here, and have the link be in support of that post

From 2.7

We don't mind if you put a link to your noncommercial site (e.g. a blog) in your signature and/or profile, but don't go around making threads to advertise it. Links, pictures and videos in posts should be relevant to the discussion, and members should be able to participate in the discussion without clicking any links or watching any videos.

 

[johnsankey]

First, we set up conditions so that a particle can "split into two". This constitutes an observation, and both halves of the split particle remain local to this first observation. When the properties of one of the split particles is determined, a second observation, the joint wave function is resolved to describe both particles, simultaneously with reference to the space-time at the now-determined point of split.

If we were not aware of (observe) the condition that provided for particle splitting, we would not be aware of any correlation until we inferred the existence of that condition by repeated observation. That would then be in effect a first observation.