Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


420chan is Getting Overhauled - Changelog/Bug Report/Request Thread (Updated April 10)
EP=EPR Ignore Report Reply
Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:50:46 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56313
File: 1471485046285.gif -(869344B / 848.97KB, 200x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 869344
Holy fucking shit guys, my mind is blown.
The unification of QM and GR is HERE!!?!?!

https://quantumfrontiers.com/2013/06/07/entanglement-wormholes/

tl;dr: Susskind says spooky action at a distance IS wormholes and the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many-Worlds Interpretation were the same thing all along from different perspectives. HOLY FUCK
>>
Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:51:44 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56314 Ignore Report Reply
>>56313
Should be 'ER=EPR'
as in Einstein-Rosen bridges are Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky action-at-a-distance. I'm dumb. nb
>>
Edward Pickering - Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:31:05 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56319 Ignore Report Reply
Wow, nobody cares about/understands physics? Sad...
>>
George Gamow - Sun, 21 Aug 2016 15:30:01 EST ID:pjhpxsvC No.56320 Ignore Report Reply
>>56313
I'd love to get hyped but I'm physically retarded (hahahah, get it?) so I always have to wait for scientists to remasticate theoretical physics into some layman chewable substance.
>>
George Hale - Sun, 21 Aug 2016 17:44:20 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56321 Ignore Report Reply
>>56320
Ok cool I get that, well let me break this down for you because this is something that if it turns out to hold water will become as big a deal for the whole planet as general relativity was for enabling space travel or quantum mechanics for enabling things like cell-phones.

So what Susskind (a famous physicist whose been around for decades) is suggesting is that the strange effect that particles have when they are quantumly entangled, where the state of one will instantaneously send information to it's entangled partner across any distance instantly (which enables things like quantum teleportation, or quantum cryptography) is the same thing as a space-time wormhole.
What this means is basically that the entire universe is a foam filled with wormholes. This means it might not be possible to just send secure information between two parties (and being able to know for certain that the communication hasn't been eavesdropped on) but that it also might be generally possible to send/receive information to vastly disconnected points in space, or possibly even forwards and backwards in time.
The other big consequence is that the long standing debate in Quantum Mechanics has actually been an argument where both sides were correct, but just looking at it from different angles. You have probably heard it described like this:
The Copenhagen Interpretation says that observation causes a collapse into a specific waveform. So when a quantum observer (this doesn't mean a consciousness necessarily, everything is a quantum observer) looks at a particle that could either be in one state or another, before the observation the particle actually exists in both states, but after the act of observation causes it to 'collapse' into one or the other. This doesn't just apply to particles, but to whole large scale systems that result from those particles (this is Schrodinger's Cat.) Scientists were uneasy about this because it seemed to imply that the mere act of looking at something and choosing to see it one way or another determined what it became, which sounds like magick.
The other interpretation, the Everett or Many-Worlds Interpretation, holds that when the wave-form collapses it is because actually all possible outcomes of the observation took place in different alternate universes, and the act of observation merely 'chooses' which universe to observe after the fact, and moves that observer down that 'world-line.'
The fact that they are the same would mean that our consciousness directly affects the world around us by the act of selecting which new reality to enter. Add this to the entanglement=wormholes thing and that means it might not only be possible to send/receive information between different spaces and different times, but also possibly different alternate realities from the one we are currently experiencing. So basically Rick and Morty (or Sliders for the old fogies) is real life. It's a big fuckin deal!
>>
Walter Adams - Sun, 21 Aug 2016 21:22:25 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56322 Ignore Report Reply
>>56321
so can we make worm hole generating station and send ships to far off places yet?
>>
Alan Guth - Sun, 21 Aug 2016 21:40:36 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56323 Ignore Report Reply
>>56322
No, but we're beginning to understand the basic science that might make such technology possible. The doorway is opened to things both science and common sense long thought impossible.
>>
Friedrich von Struve - Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:17:16 EST ID:gRBEStbH No.56326 Ignore Report Reply
>>56320
A layman's guide. And not about ER=EPR, but the Holographic Principle. If you know that, ER=EPR will be easier to digest. AMPS(event horizon=a firewall) too.
http://bookzz.org/book/1172778/a849a4 The Black Hole War
>>
James Christy - Fri, 26 Aug 2016 02:03:38 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56327 Ignore Report Reply
>>56323
worm holes or warp drive. What is more likely to happen? I am assuming either option requires vast power.
>>
Carl Seyfert - Fri, 26 Aug 2016 18:06:00 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56328 Ignore Report Reply
>>56327
We don't know enough to know. We know wormholes are possible and may exist, but we aren't even sure a space-time warp effect like an Alcubierre warp drive is possible. If I had to take a guess, I would say if warp is possible, it would be easier.
>>
Allan Sandage - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 01:34:56 EST ID:1xERvVrq No.56329 Ignore Report Reply
>>56314
>Should be 'ER=EPR'
>as in Einstein-Rosen bridges are Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky action-at-a-distance.

I got similar tingle the first time I encounter it too.

quantum entanglement and spacetime geometry
>>
Allan Sandage - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 01:49:43 EST ID:1xERvVrq No.56330 Ignore Report Reply
>>56327
>worm holes or warp drive. What is more likely to happen?
I would love to see the race between trying to collapse entangled particles into entangled blackhole for wormhole versus trying to synthesize negative mass from Casimir effect for Alcubierre drive.

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equation-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>Now suppose Alice and Bob, universally acknowledged to be the most capable quantum experimenters ever imagined, start collecting these real entangled particles in the vacuum. Alice takes one member of each pair and Bob takes the other. They fly away separately to distant realms of space and then each smushes their particles so densely that they become a black hole. Because of the entanglement these particles started with, Alice and Bob have now created two entangled black holes. If ER=EPR is right, a wormhole will link those black holes; entanglement, therefore, can be described using the geometry of wormholes. “This is a remarkable claim whose impact has yet to be appreciated,” Susskind writes.
>Even more remarkable, he suggests, is the possibility that two entangled subatomic particles alone are themselves somehow connected by a sort of quantum wormhole. Since wormholes are contortions of spacetime geometry — described by Einstein’s gravitational equations — identifying them with quantum entanglement would forge a link between gravity and quantum mechanics.
>>
Edward Pickering - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 19:02:15 EST ID:gRBEStbH No.56332 Ignore Report Reply
>>56330
Leonard Susskind space is entangled with space
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH-3bFqtJjg
>>
Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:08:42 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56333 Ignore Report Reply
>>56332
Fascinating (if a bit dry) talk. I wonder if he deliberately did not go into other properties of black holes that might negate the limitations he described, or doesn't think they are relevant. Specifically I mean that we know we ultimately can get (all of) the information out of a black hole ultimately as it evaporates due to hawking radiation, could we then not (especially if we are creating a black hole from scratch and thus can make it as small as we want) project entangled particles into the entangled black hole and thus receive information out of the entangled black hole partner in the form of the hawking radiation it emits?
>>
Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:31:39 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56334 Ignore Report Reply
>>56333
Just thinking about it some more (nb for double post) wouldn't it even be possible to get information out without hawking radiation by manipulating the size of the black hole? If the two black holes share the same singularity then putting mass into one increases the mass of the other, and so if you dumped mass into one it would alter the rate of evaporation of the other which could then be measured.
>>
Russel Hulse - Fri, 02 Sep 2016 23:49:51 EST ID:d5o+epTm No.56363 Ignore Report Reply
1472874591251.gif -(2904316B / 2.77MB, 300x170) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56334

damn shit nigga thats some crazy shit, my mind is bending trying to get a full grasp on the implications


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.