Quantum Entanglement Quotes

Our experiences are all a result of our personal energy signature, which develops from our focus of attention. Once we realize this, we can create a world of light and love in our personal consciousness, which also flows into the consciousness of humanity and the entire cosmos.

When we hold health and abundance in our self-identity, we create experiences of that quality. If we choose to be attuned to the energy of our heart and feel love and compassion, we create experiences in the same energy spectrum as that of peace, love and joy.

As we raise our vibrations through awareness of our true being, our energy field expands in radiance and beauty. Our awareness also expands with our energy field, and we become more intuitive and telepathic. We become more heart-centered in our personal relationships and with ourselves.

The only way for photons to know when they’re being observed is if they are conscious beings. In the quantum world, each of the parts is aware of the whole. A single photon is aware of the quantum state of the entire universe instantaneously always. It has this quality, because it is part of the universal consciousness, in which we are also participants.

When you separate an entwined particle and you move both parts away from the other, even at opposite ends of the universe, if you alter or affect one, the other will be identically altered or affected. Spooky. (Adam in Only Lovers Left Alive)

Spooky action at a distance.

Life is a field of cosmic consciousness, expressing itself in million ways in space-time through quantum entanglement

If quantum entanglement is true, if related particles react in similar or opposite ways even when separated by tremendous distances, then it is obvious that the whole world is alive and communicating in ways we do not fully understand.

Of course, minute as its impact may be in our physical universe, the fact of quantum entanglement is this: If one logically inexplicable thing is known to exist, then this permits the existence of all logically inexplicable things. A thing may be of deeper impossibility than another, in the sense that you can be more deeply underwater--but whether you are five feet or five fathoms from the surface you are still all wet.

Matt laughed. "Close. That was last year. This year it's Obsessive Deovtion to Fourier Analysis Theory and Applications. And my personal favorite, Quantum Physics II: Romantic Entanglements of Energy and Matter." Julie turned her head to Matt. "You're a double major? Physics and math? Jesus..." "I know. Nerdy." He shrugged. "No, I'm impressed. I'm just surprised your brains fit in your head." "I was fitted with a specially desinged compression filter that allows excessive information to lie dormant until I need to access it. It's only the Beta version, so excuse any kinks that may appear. I really can't be held responsible.

If you believe that you are NOT omnipresent, omniscient and ultimately omnipotent – you are delusional. If you believe that you are separate from that which you call God, then you are living a lie.

entanglement: (n.) quantum physics term for when the sheets wrap around two bodies in space.

Quantum Machine Learning is defined as the branch of science and technology that is concerned with the application of quantum mechanical phenomena such as superposition, entanglement and tunneling for designing software and hardware to provide machines the ability to learn insights and patterns from data and the environment, and the ability to adapt automatically to changing situations with high precision, accuracy and speed. 

The Time (T) and Energy (E) we invest in others, people will take it and carry it with them.

Under the microscope of quantum attention function we can explain EPR paradox, bell inequalities, W and GHZ state, quantum entanglement, decoherence, nonlocality, and quantum correlations in a coherent manner.

This book is about entanglements. To be entangled is not simply to be intertwined with another, as in the joining of separate entities, but to lack an independent, self-contained existence. Existence is not an individual affair. Individuals do not preexist their interactions; rather, individuals emerge through and as pare of their entangled intra-relating . Which is not to say that emergence happens once and for all, as an event or as a process that takes place according to some external measure of space and of time, but rather that time and space, like matter and meaning, come into existence, are iteratively recon figured through each intra-action, there by making it impossible to differentiate in any absolute sense between creation and renewal, beginning and returning, continuity and discontinuity, here and there, past and future.

The very nature of materiality is an entanglement. Matter itself is always already open to, or rather entangled with, the "Other." The intra-actively emergent "parts" of phenomena are coconstituted. Not only subjects but also objects are permeated through and through with their entangled kin; the other is not just in one's skin, but in one's bones, in one's belly, in one's heart, in one's nucleus, in one's past and future. This is as true for electrons as it is for brittlestars as it is for the differentially constituted human . . . What is on the other side of the agential cut is not separate from us--agential separability is not individuation. Ethics is therefore not about right response to a radically exterior/ized other, but about responsibility and accountability for the lively relationalities of becoming of which we are a part.

There is a cosmic “entanglement” between every atom of our body and atoms that are light-years distant. Since all matter came from a single explosion, the big bang, in some sense the atoms of our body are linked with some atoms on the other side of the universe in some kind of cosmic quantum web. Entangled particles are somewhat like twins still joined by an umbilical cord (their wave function) which can be light-years across. What happens to one member automatically affects the other, and hence knowledge concerning one particle can instantly reveal knowledge about its pair. Entangled pairs act as if they were a single object, although they may be separated by a large distance.

What Warcollier demonstrated is compatible with what modern cognitive neuroscience has learned about how visual images are constructed by the brain. It implies that telepathic perceptions bubble up into awareness from the unconscious and are probably processed in the brain in the same way that we generate images in dreams. And thus telepathic “images” are far less certain than sensory-driven images and subject to distortion.

It's been so long since I last had sex that I sometimes go to my local coffee shop just to hear someone scream my name.

Words in the air are frequencies, statements of intent are energies you cant see or measure them for it is Quantum

Einstein’s ‘spooky interactions.’” Einstein had famously described quantum entanglement as “spooky action at a distance.

Quantum mechanics. What a repository, a dump, of human aspiration it was, the borderland where mathematical rigor defeated common sense, and reason and fantasy irrationally merged. Here the mystically inclined could find whatever they required and claim science as their proof. And for these ingenious men in their spare time, what ghostly and beautiful music it must be--spectral asymmetry, resonances, entanglement, quantum harmonic oscillators--beguiling ancient airs, the harmony of the spheres that might transmute a lead wall into gold and bring into being the engine that ran on virtually nothing, on virtual particles, that emitted no harm and would power the human enterprise as well as save it. Beard was stirred by the yearnings of these lonely men. And why should he think they were lonely? It was not, or not only, condescension that made him think them so. They did not know enough, but they knew too much to have anyone to talk to. What mate waiting down the pub or in the British Legion, what hard-pressed wife with job and kids and housework, was going to follow them down these warped funnels in the space-time continuum, into the wormhole, the shortcut to a single, final answer to the global problem of energy?

Name the colors, blind the eye” is an old Zen saying, illustrating that the intellect’s habitual ways of branding and labeling creates a terrible experiential loss by displacing the vibrant, living reality with a steady stream of labels. It is the same way with space, which is solely the conceptual mind’s way of clearing its throat, of pausing between identified symbols. At any rate, the subjective truth of this is now supported by actual experiments (as we saw in the quantum theory chapters) that strongly suggest distance (space) has no reality whatsoever for entangled particles, no matter how great their apparent separation.

Knowing that a particle can occupy two different states at the same time—a state known as superposition—and, two particles, such as two particles of light, or photons, can become entangled, means that there is a unique, coupled state in which an action, like a measurement, upon one particle immediately causes a correlated change in the other. If there is a better word to describe my relationship with Fanio than entangled, I have yet to hear it. Even when the two entangled particles—or people—are separated by a great distance (and I mean emotional or physical distance, such as mine with Epifanio, or like being at opposite ends of the universe), their movements or actions affect each other. Yet, before any measurements or other assessments occur, the actual "spin states" of either of the two particles are uncertain and even unknowable.

Makes me so happy every time you find out how small the world is, you know? Like, we were in that place at the same time and now here we are. At different points in our lives but still connected. Like quantum entanglement or some shit.” “I think about that every time I’m in an airport. It’s one reason I love traveling so much. As a kid, I was a loner, and I always figured that when I grew up, I’d leave my hometown and discover other people like me somewhere else. Which I have, you know? But everyone gets lonely sometimes, and whenever that happens, I buy a plane ticket and go to the airport and—I don’t know. I don’t feel lonely anymore. Because no matter what makes all those people different, they’re all just trying to get somewhere, waiting to reach someone.

As a measurement apparatus interacts with a quantum system, the two become entangled with each other. There are no wave-function collapses or classical realms. The apparatus itself evolves into a superposition, entangled with the state of the thing being observed.

In an agential realist account, agency is cut loose from its traditional humanist orbit. Agency is not aligned with human intentionality or subjectivity. Nor does it merely entail resignification or other specific kinds of moves within a social geometry ofantihumanism. The space of agency is not only substantially larger than that allowed for in Butler's performative account, for example, but also, perhaps rather surprisingly, larger than what liberal humanism proposes. Significantly, matter is an agentive factor in its iterative materialization.

Quantum physicists discovered that physical atoms are made up of vortices of energy that are constantly spinning and vibrating; each atom is like a wobbly spinning top that radiates energy. Because each atom has its own specific energy signature (wobble), assemblies of atoms (molecules) collectively radiate their own identifying energy patterns. So every material structure in the universe, including you and me, radiates a unique energy signature. If it were theoretically possible to observe the composition of an actual atom with a microscope, what would we see? Imagine a swirling dust devil cutting across the desert’s floor. Now remove the sand and dirt from the funnel cloud. What you have left is an invisible, tornado-like vortex. A number of infinitesimally small, dust devil–like energy vortices called quarks and photons collectively make up the structure of the atom. From far away, the atom would likely appear as a blurry sphere. As its structure came nearer to focus, the atom would become less clear and less distinct. As the surface of the atom drew near, it would disappear. You would see nothing. In fact, as you focused through the entire structure of the atom, all you would observe is a physical void. The atom has no physical structure—the emperor has no clothes! Remember the atomic models you studied in school, the ones with marbles and ball bearings going around like the solar system? Let’s put that picture beside the “physical” structure of the atom discovered by quantum physicists. No, there has not been a printing mistake; atoms are made out of invisible energy not tangible matter! So in our world, material substance (matter) appears out of thin air. Kind of weird, when you think about it. Here you are holding this physical book in your hands. Yet if you were to focus on the book’s material substance with an atomic microscope, you would see that you are holding nothing. As it turns out, we undergraduate biology majors were right about one thing—the quantum universe is mind-bending. Let’s look more closely at the “now you see it, now you don’t” nature of quantum physics. Matter can simultaneously be defined as a solid (particle) and as an immaterial force field (wave). When scientists study the physical properties of atoms, such as mass and weight, they look and act like physical matter. However, when the same atoms are described in terms of voltage potentials and wavelengths, they exhibit the qualities and properties of energy (waves). (Hackermüller, et al, 2003; Chapman, et al, 1995; Pool 1995) The fact that energy and matter are one and the same is precisely what Einstein recognized when he concluded that E = mc2. Simply stated, this equation reveals that energy (E) = matter (m, mass) multiplied by the speed of light squared (c2). Einstein revealed that we do not live in a universe with discrete, physical objects separated by dead space. The Universe is one indivisible, dynamic whole in which energy and matter are so deeply entangled it is impossible to consider them as independent elements.

Even if a particle could travel backward in time, information could not. Retrocausality will be replaced by something more sophisticated. There are no perfect symmetries, there is no pure randomness everything is an approximation of something else. Information may appear in a digital form but meaning never does. Spacetime is built up from approximations, not discrete ones and zeros, and the only constant may be ratios. Quantum entanglement and geometry; if we think of a particle as being at one pole of an expanding sphere that is not perfectly symmetrical, this surface would be "rippling" like the surface of the ocean (in the audio world this is called dithering), at the other pole is the entangled particle's pair and it is a property of the sphere that gives the illusion of connectivity. This is not a physical geometry, it is a computational geometry. Is spacetime a product of entanglement? Renate Loll believes that time is not perfectly symmetrical. Her computer models require causality. Possibly some form of quantum random walk in state space. If a photon is emitted by an electron inside of a clock on Earth and it travels to a clock four light years away, time stops for the clock on Earth and time jumps forward eight years for the distant clock also, the electron that will capture the photon becomes infinitely large relative to the photon but the electron that emitted it does not become infinitely small therefore, time is not perfectly symmetrical.

When the quantum coherence in the microtubules is lost, as in cardiac arrest, or death, the Planck scale quantum information in our heads dissipates, or leaks out, to the Planck scale in the universe as a whole. The quantum information which had comprised our conscious and subconscious minds during life doesn't completely dissipate, but hangs together because of quantum entanglement. Because it stays in quantum superposition and doesn't undergo quantum state reduction or collapse, it's more like our subconscious mind, like our dreams. And because the universe at the Planck scale is non-local, it exists holographically, indefinitely. Is this the soul? Why not.

You are all wave particles when I close my eyes. I am no more entranced by your entanglement than a butterfly is to a bee.

I long for the day when someone loves me as much as women in commercials love yogurt.

Try thinking of a color that doesn't exist.

If being lazy was an Olympic sport, I would totally win the bronze.

People who say 'everything happens for a reason' have never puked on their fiancé's grandmother during Easter dinner.

Einstein, uncharacteristically, was wrong.

The Quantum Age takes us far beyond the Information Age to a way of living in which we delight in uncertainty, thrive in entanglement, and flourish with an awareness of many possibilities.

As I'm coming to realize more and more, God holds everything together in a mysterious quantum entanglement. With each breath we participate in the life-death-life pattern that always ends in resurrection. My hope is that each of us will choose to participate consciously, aware of this privilege and delight in being co-creators with God. Just pray that I can do whatever God wants me to do.

I linked our ancestor's aborted promises to my own, a kind of quantum entanglement. I attempted to erase the distance between us, the years, the laws of physics and of man--just papery things, really. I'd seen my share of time travel flics, and it seemed plausible. Scientists say we are not matter but energy. A sheet of paper turns out to be a magic carpet after all, so I hop on, riding its electric waves through time.

Einstein understood it as well as anyone, and continued to make fundamental contributions to the subject, including demonstrating the importance of quantum entanglement, which plays a central role in our current best picture of how the universe really works. What he failed to do was to convince his fellow physicists of the inadequacy of the Copenhagen approach, and the importance of trying harder to understand the foundations of quantum theory.

religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systemic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.

This is a general feature of quantum entanglement: the no-signaling theorem, according to which an entangled pair of particles cannot actually be used to transmit information between two parties faster than light. So quantum mechanics seems to be exploiting a subtle loophole, violating the spirit of relativity (nothing travels faster than the speed of light) while obeying the letter of the law (actual physical particles, and whatever useful information they might convey, cannot travel faster than the speed of light).

Why are quantum computers so powerful? he asks. Because the electrons are simultaneously calculating in parallel universes. They are interacting and interfering with each other via entanglement. So they can quickly outrace a traditional computer that computes in only one universe.

A point that should be emphasized is that the energy that defines the lifetime of the superposed state is an energy difference, and not the total, (mass-) energy that is involved in the situation as a whole. Thus, for a lump that is quite large but does not move very much-and supposing that it is also crystalline, so that its individual atoms do not get randomly displaced-quantum superpositions could be maintained for a long time. The lump could be much larger than the water droplets considered above. There could also be other very much larger masses in the vicinity, provided that they do not get significantly entangled with the superposed state we are concerned with. (These considerations would be important for solid-state devices, such as gravitational wave detectors, that use coherently oscillating solid-perhaps crystalline-bodies.)

This was matter’s most honest state in any case; superposition, quantum tunnelling, entanglement, cleavance, wormhole fracture; all of the strange furniture of quantum mechanics appeared to be the universe’s true face. All else was matter trying to seem sober, putting on laws for show.

Absolutely everything in the symbolic realm, for example, has come into existence at one point in time, and will eventually die—even mountains. Yet consciousness, like aspects of quantum theory involving entangled particles, may exist outside of time altogether. Finally, some revert to the “control” aspect

Decoherence – entanglement with the environment – is the very process by which information passes from the quantum system to its environment. It’s what makes this information accessible: what makes the pointer move. Thanks to einselection, the information gets filtered in the process so that only the pointer states survive.

His eyes close for a moment. If I knew they would stay closed, I wouldn't be able to help myself: I'd trace a finger down his nose, around the curve of his mouth, not touching him but relishing in the almost. I hate how entangled we still feel on a quantum level. Like my body will never stop trying to find its way back to his.

Furthermore, I argue that ethics is not simply about responsible actions in relation to human experiences of the world; rather, it is a question of material entanglements and how each intra-action matters in the reconfiguring of these entanglements, that is, it is a matter of the ethical call that is embodied in the very worlding of the world.

It is ironic that while environmental activists are busy reifying a notion of nature based on purity, with all its problematic implications, the enterprise of bioengineering is making it crystal clear that the nature-culture dualism is a construction, a point that feminists and other social critics have been trying to get across for some time.

Everything in the universe is connected, a fact long known by astrologers but now being recognized by scientists using quantum mechanics, which suggests that every atom affects other atoms. In quantum physics, everything is made of waves and particles and works according to entanglement theory, which suggests that no particle is entirely independent. In a nutshell, everything in the universe works together and the movements of the cosmic bodies activate energy within us and the natural world. In other words, we are entangled with the entire universe. All the energies intertwine in an intricate dance of planetary magic and science, and the language of astrology interprets that dance.

Quantum mechanics. What a repository, a dump, of human aspiration it was, the borderland where mathematical rigor defeated common sense, and reason and fantasy irrationally merged. Here the mystically inclined could find whatever they required and claim science as their proof. And for these ingenious men in their spare time, what ghostly and beautiful music it must be—spectral asymmetry, resonances, entanglement, quantum harmonic oscillators—beguiling ancient airs, the harmony of the spheres that might transmute a lead wall into gold and bring into being the engine that ran on virtually nothing, on virtual particles, that emitted no harm and would power the human enterprise as well as save it.

Objectivity means being accountablefor marks on bodies, that is, specific materializations in their differential mattering. We are responsible for the cuts that we help enact not because we do the choosing (neither do we escape responsibility because "we" are "chosen" by them), but because we are an agential part of the material becoming of the universe.

In the intricate and mutable space-time geometry at the black hole, in-falling matter and energy interacted with the virtualities of the vacuum in ways unknown to the flatter cosmos beyond it. Quasi-stable quantum states appeared, linked according to Schrodinger's wave functions and their own entanglement, more and more of them, intricacy compounding until it amounted to a set of codes. The uncertainty principle wrought mutations; variants perished or flourished; forms competed, cooperated, merged, divided, interacted; the patterns multiplied and diversified; at last, along one fork on a branch of the life tree, thought budded. That life was not organic, animal and vegetable and lesser kingdoms, growing, breathing, drinking, eating, breeding, hunting, hiding; it kindled no fires and wielded no tools; from the beginning, it was a kind of oneness. An original unity differentiated itself into countless avatars, like waves on a sea. They arose and lived individually, coalesced when they chose by twos or threes or multitudes, reemerged as other than they had been, gave themselves and their experiences back to the underlying whole. Evolution, history, lives eerily resembled memes in organic minds. Yet quantum life was not a series of shifting abstractions. Like the organic, it was in and of its environment. It acted to alter its quantum states and those around it: action that manifested itself as electronic, photonic, and nuclear events. Its domain was no more shadowy to it than ours is to us. It strove, it failed, it achieved. They were never sure aboardEnvoy whether they could suppose it loved, hated, yearned, mourned, rejoiced. The gap between was too wide for any language to bridge. Nevertheless they were convinced that it knew something they might as well call emotion, and that that included wondering.

This is the quantum phenomenon known as entanglement. There is a single wave function for the combined electron+camera system, consisting of a superposition of various possibilities of the form “the electron was at this location, and the camera observed it at the same location.” Rather than the electron and the camera doing their own thing, there is a connection between the two systems.

One of the fantastic things about Bell’s theorem is that it turns the supposed spookiness of quantum entanglement into a straightforwardly experimental question—does nature exhibit intrinsically nonlocal correlations between faraway particles, or not? You’ll be happy to hear that experiments have been done, and the predictions of quantum mechanics have been spectacularly verified every time. There is a tradition in popular media of writing articles with breathless headlines like “Quantum Reality Is Even More Bizarre Than Previously Believed!” But when you look into the results they are actually reporting, it’s another experiment that confirms exactly what a competent quantum mechanic would have predicted all along using the theory that had been established by 1927, or at least by 1935. We understand quantum mechanics enormously better now than we did back then, but the theory itself hasn’t changed.

Can we build a quantum-entanglement phone, for which the speed of light is not a limitation at all? No, we can’t. This is pretty clear in our simple example: if Alice measures spin-up, she instantly knows that Bob will also measure spin-up when he gets around to it. But Bob doesn’t know that. In order for him to know what the spin of his particle is, Alice has to send him her measurement result by conventional means—which are limited by the speed of light.

and respected reality. That hope was definitively squashed by John Stewart Bell, a physicist from Northern Ireland who worked at the CERN laboratory in Geneva, Switzerland. He became interested in the foundations of quantum mechanics in the 1960s, at a point in physics history when it was considered thoroughly disreputable to spend time thinking about such things. Today Bell’s theorem on entanglement is considered one of the most important results in physics.

I know there is no such thing as forever. Someday we will die and our bones will turn to dust. Someday humankind will be gone and the earth will be ruled by sentient rabbits, or by the machines we leave behind, or by creatures we can't even imagine. And then the sun will go supernova and swallow the earth and all the other planets, and the universe will continue to expand until the bonds of gravity loosen and all things drift away into the darkness, and all stars will go silent and cold, and matter itself will break down into nothingness. Time will end, and there will be nothing but vast, cold, empty space. The atoms that once composed our bodies will be dispersed across unimaginable distances. But then, subatomic particles are connected in ways we don't understand. Two particles that have interacted physically are bound by quantum entanglement. They will react to each other even after being separated, no matter the distance, linked by intangible cords across space and time.

This gets at the essence of why quantum computers are so unique and useful. An ordinary digital computer, in a sense, is like several accountants toiling away independently in an office, each doing one calculation separately, and handing off their answers from one to another. But a quantum computer is like a roomful of interacting accountants, each one simultaneously computing, and, importantly, communicating with each other via entanglement. So we say that they are coherently solving this problem together.

Near dawn, she whispers, “Durga … now we’re bound up.” I clench up. This is it. She’s going to cling to me like Arjuna did. “How so?” “It’s like quantum entanglement. Our bodies have exchanged matter and so now we’re interlinked.” She sounds intimate. I deflect. “I didn’t get that far in nano.” “You learn it second year!” I have to lie again. She’s making me lie. “I switched to comp lit after my first year.” “Oh. Well, it means that if we think of our bodies as particles, our states are the same right now, but then when we separate, we remain entangled. Now it’s impossible to describe you without describing me, and vice versa. We tell each other’s stories by living our own lives.” I feel angry. As angry as I felt euphoric six hours ago. I try to control my voice. “That could be scary. Depending.” “True,” she says. “It means that relationships never end. Once made, they just influence each other backwards and forwards in time, for better or worse.” She nudges my arm open and docks her head against my breast. “But I’d say this is for better.

Von Neumann showed that, for many purposes, the fact that entangled subsystems don’t have definite wave functions of their own is analogous to having a wave function, but we just don’t know what it is. Quantum subsystems, in other words, closely resemble the classical situation where there are many possible states that look macroscopically the same. And this uncertainty can be quantified into what we now call the entanglement entropy. The higher the entropy of a quantum subsystem, the more it’s entangled with the outside world.

Einstein and his colleagues made the perfectly reasonable assumption of locality: that the properties of a particle are localized on that particle, and what happens here can’t affect what happens there without some way of transmitting the effects across the intervening space. It seems so self-evident that it hardly appears to be an assumption at all. But this locality is just what quantum entanglement undermines – which is why ‘spooky action at a distance’ is precisely the wrong way to look at it. We can’t regard particle A and particle B in the EPR experiment as separate entities, even though they are separated in space. As far as quantum mechanics is concerned, entanglement makes them both parts of a single object. Or to put it another way, the spin of particle A is not located solely on A in the way that the redness of a cricket ball is located on the cricket ball. In quantum mechanics, properties can be non-local. Only if we accept Einstein’s assumption of locality do we need to tell the story in terms of a measurement on particle A ‘influencing’ the spin of particle B. Quantum non-locality is the alternative to that view.

Everettian worlds are the same way. We don’t need to keep track of the entire wave function to make useful predictions, just what happens in an individual world. To a good approximation we can treat what happens in each world using classical mechanics, with just the occasional quantum intervention when we entangle with microscopic systems in superposition. That’s why Newton’s laws of gravitation and motion are sufficient to fly rockets to the moon without knowing the complete quantum state of the universe; our individual branch of the wave function describes an emergent almost-classical world.

As Laszlo describes in his Summing Up, the quantum hologram is a nonlocal quantum information structure derived from Max Planck’s study in the late nineteenth century of the surprising radiation emitted by material substances, called “black body radiation.” For most of the twentieth century such radiation was believed to be curious random photon emissions from matter, and of minimal interest—until Schempp demonstrated that the emissions are entangled, coherent, and carry nonlocal information about the emitting object. Subsequent studies have shown such nonlocal information to be fundamental not only to our normal perceptual faculties but also that it forms the basis of intuitive-level information.

Because for Everettians, the explanation of the quantum arrow of time is the same as that of the entropic arrow of time: the initial conditions of the universe. Branching happens when systems become entangled with the environment and decohere, which unfolds as time moves toward the future, not the past. The number of branches of the wave function, just like the entropy, only increases with time. That means that the number of branches was relatively small to begin with. In other words, that there was a relatively low amount of entanglement between various systems and the environment in the far past. As with entropy, this is an initial condition we impose on the state of the universe, and at the present

It’s for this reason that Everett titled his eventual paper on the subject “‘Relative State’ Formulation of Quantum Mechanics.” As a measurement apparatus interacts with a quantum system, the two become entangled with each other. There are no wave-function collapses or classical realms. The apparatus itself evolves into a superposition, entangled with the state of the thing being observed. The apparently definite measurement outcome (“the electron is spin-up”) is only relative to a particular state of the apparatus (“I measured the electron to be spin-up”). The other possible measurement outcomes still exist and are perfectly real, just as separate worlds. All we have to do is to courageously face up to what quantum mechanics has been trying to tell us all along.

Instead, let’s consider an equal superposition of two basis states, one with both spins up, and the other with both spins down: If Alice measures her spin along the vertical axis, she has a fifty-fifty chance of getting spin-up or spin-down, and likewise for Bob. The difference now is that if we learn Alice’s outcome before Bob does his measurement, we know what Bob will see with 100 percent confidence—he’s going to see the same thing that Alice did. In the language of textbook quantum mechanics, Alice’s measurement collapses the wave function onto one of the two basis states, leaving Bob with a deterministic outcome. (In Many-Worlds language, Alice’s measurement branches the wave function, creating two different Bobs, each of whom will get a certain outcome.) That’s entanglement in action.

Although relativity treats space and time as if they were on an equal footing, quantum mechanics generally does not. The Schrödinger equation, in particular, treats them very differently: it literally describes how the quantum state evolves with time. “Space” may or may not be part of that equation, depending on what system we’re looking at, but time is fundamental. It’s plausible that the symmetry between space and time that we’re familiar with from relativity isn’t built into quantum gravity, but emerges in the classical approximation. It is nevertheless overwhelmingly tempting to wonder whether time, like space, might be emergent rather than fundamental, and whether entanglement might have anything to do with it. The answer is yes on both counts, although the details remain a little sketchy.

The Many-Worlds formulation of quantum mechanics removes once and for all any mystery about the measurement process and collapse of the wave function. We don’t need special rules about making an observation: all that happens is that the wave function keeps chugging along in accordance with the Schrödinger equation. And there’s nothing special about what constitutes “a measurement” or “an observer”—a measurement is any interaction that causes a quantum system to become entangled with the environment, creating decoherence and a branching into separate worlds, and an observer is any system that brings such an interaction about. Consciousness, in particular, has nothing to do with it. The “observer” could be an earthworm, a microscope, or a rock. There’s not even anything special about macroscopic systems, other than the fact that they can’t help but interact and become entangled with the environment. The price we pay for such powerful and simple unification of quantum dynamics is a large number of separate worlds.

That simple process—macroscopic objects become entangled with the environment, which we cannot keep track of—is decoherence, and it comes with universe-altering consequences. Decoherence causes the wave function to split, or branch, into multiple worlds. Any observer branches into multiple copies along with the rest of the universe. After branching, each copy of the original observer finds themselves in a world with some particular measurement outcome. To them, the wave function seems to have collapsed. We know better; the collapse is only apparent, due to decoherence splitting the wave function. We don’t know how often branching happens, or even whether that’s a sensible question to ask. It depends on whether there are a finite or infinite number of degrees of freedom in the universe, which is currently an unanswered question in fundamental physics. But we do know that there’s a lot of branching going on; it happens every time a quantum system in a superposition becomes entangled with the environment. In a typical human body, about 5,000 atoms undergo radioactive decay every second. If every decay branches the wave function in two, that’s 25000 new branches every second. It’s a lot.

Lovelock comments in response . . . We [as scientists] had become so used to thinking in terms of cause and effect that we no longer seemed to realize that the whole could be more than the sum of its parts. . . . The Earth self regulates its climate and chemistry so as to keep itself habitable and it is this that is the sticking point for many, if not most, scientists. Such a conclusion could never have come from reductionist thinking, and that is why arguments with biologists and others over Gaia have been so acrimonious for so long. The fact that reductionist science cannot offer a rational explanation for quantum phenomena like entanglement, nor of whole systems phenomena such as emergence, does not mean that these phenomena do not exist. Their existence confirms the limits of the Cartesian view of the universe. . . . Eminent representatives of the Earth and Life sciences secure in their disciplines ignored the fact that organisms massively alter their environment as well as adapting to it, and they did not see the evolution of the organisms and the evolution of their environment as a single coupled process. . . . I know it is unrealistic to expect them to welcome a theory like Gaia, which not only asks them to join together as if married but also to take a vow to believe in the phenomena of emergence.

If dimensions are virtual like the particles in quantum foam are virtual then, entanglement is information that is in more than one location (hologram). There are no particles, they may be wave packets but the idea of quantum is, a precise ratio of action in relationship to the environment. Feynman's path integral is not infinite, it is fractal. If you look at a star many light years away, the photon that hits your eye leaves the star precisely when the timing for the journey will end at your eye because the virtual dimension of the journey is zero distance or zero time. Wheeler said that if your eye is not there to receive the photon then it won't leave the star in the distant past. If the dimension in the direction of travel is zero, you have a different relationship then if it is zero time in terms of the property of the virtual dimensions. Is a particle really a wave packet? Could something like a "phase transition" involve dimensions that are more transitory then we imagined. Example; a photon as a two dimensional sheet is absorbed by an electron so that the photon becomes a part of the geometry of the electron in which the electrons dimensions change in some manner. Could "scale" have more variation and influence on space and time that our models currently predict? Could information, scale, and gravity be intimately related?

On his journey home from delivering his acceptance speech in Sweden the following summer, Einstein stopped in Copenhagen to see Bohr, who met him at the train station to take him home by streetcar. On the ride, they got into a debate. “We took the streetcar and talked so animatedly that we went much too far,” Bohr recalled. “We got off and traveled back, but again rode too far.” Neither seemed to mind, for the conversation was so engrossing. “We rode to and fro,” according to Bohr, “and I can well imagine what the people thought about us.”43 More than just a friendship, their relationship became an intellectual entanglement that began with divergent views about quantum mechanics but then expanded into related issues of science, knowledge, and philosophy. “In all the history of human thought, there is no greater dialogue than that which took place over the years between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein about the meaning of the quantum,” says the physicist John Wheeler, who studied under Bohr. The social philosopher C. P. Snow went further. “No more profound intellectual debate has ever been conducted,” he proclaimed.44 Their dispute went to the fundamental heart of the design of the cosmos: Was there an objective reality that existed whether or not we could ever observe it? Were there laws that restored strict causality to phenomena that seemed inherently random? Was everything in the universe predetermined?

Foundational Principles: Nature is lazy, it likes to copy. Everything is information. Information is not stuff, it is relationships. All behaviors are constrained by relationships. All behaviors are emergent. Every engine takes advantage of a difference. Everything is an approximation of something else. Ratio may be the only thing that is discrete. The bending of spacetime is a variation of scale. Behavior is built from a quantum of action in a field. If dimensions are virtual in the same way that the dimensions of consciousness are virtual then the density of information in a field will affect the scale or bending of spacetime. Gravity and scale are related. Gravity and information are related. Information and scale are related. If it's relational, there's a geometry involved. Truth as a scale coordinate; truth lives in the macro world, the micro world is uncertain. Truth as a time coordinate; truth lives in the past, the future is uncertain. Information from the micro future is formed into a macro past. The process of formation involves entanglement. Coffee and cream; 1) separate, 2) complex, 3) homogeneous. Information appears to increase and then decrease.

verschränkung’, later translated into English as ‘entanglement’,

Precise knowledge of how all things are entangled with all others at the quantum level.

Creating an answer from axioms or rules of the game; Achilles can never overtake the tortoise because of infinite regress or Achilles will always overtake the tortoise given enough time because Achilles will always cover more distance than the tortoise in the same unit of time. We are dealing with information. If dimensions are virtual like the particles in quantum foam are virtual then, entanglement is information that is in more than one place (hologram). There are no particles, they may be wave packets but the idea of quantum is, a precise ratio of action in relationship to the environment. Feynman's path integral is not infinite, it is fractal.

The quantum measurement problem is caused by a failure to understand that each species has its own sensory world and that when we say the wave function collapses and brings a particle into existence we mean the particle is brought into existence in the human sensory world by the combined operation of the human sensory apparatus, particle detectors and the experimental set up. This is similar to the Copenhagen Interpretation suggested by Niels Bohr and others, but the understanding that the collapse of the wave function brings a particle into existence in the human sensory world removes the need for a dividing line between the quantum world and the macro world.

Indeed, it is the quantum entanglement between the “object” and the “agencies of observation,” in this case, between the atom and the apparatus that is precisely what we need to attend to in making the interference pattern evident. Once again we see evidence for the ontological priority of phenomena over objects. If one focuses on abstract individual entities the result is an utter mystery, we cannot account for the seemingly impossible behavior of the atoms. It’s not that the experimenter changes a past that had already been present or that atoms fall in line with a new future simply by erasing information. The point is that the past was never simply there to begin with and the future is not simply what will unfold; the “past” and the “future” are iteratively reworked and enfolded through the iterative practices of spacetimemattering—including the which-slit detection and the subsequent erasure of which-slit information—all are one phenomenon.

For Einstein, externality is a relation of spatial separation. For Bohr, on the other hand, the individuation of “observer” from “observed” is not the result of spacetime separability, because one cannot help oneself to spacetime descriptions. Rather, individuation is the result of specific intra-actions that entail the larger material arrangement. In my elaboration of Bohr’s account, I argue that objectivity is premised on an agential (or enacted) ontological separability, an individuation-within-and-as-part-of-the-phenomenon enacted in the placement of the cut between “observer” and “observed,” rather than an absolute notion of externality.

Rather, objectivity is a matter of accountability to marks on bodies. Objectivity is based not on an inherent ontological separability, a relation of absolute exteriority, as Einstein would have it, but on an intra-actively enacted agential separability, a relation of exteriority within phenomena. The reproducibility and unambiguous communication of laboratory results are possible because the agential cut enacts determinate boundaries, properties, and meanings, as well as a causal structure in the marking of the “measuring agencies” (“effect”) by the “measured object” (“cause”) within the phenomenon.

Knowing is not an ideational affair, or a capacity that is the exclusive birthright of the human. Knowing is a material practice, a specific engagement of the world where part of the world becomes differentially intelligible to another part of the world in its differential accountability to or for that of which it is a part. Hence, knowing is not a play of ideas within the mind of a Cartesian subject that stands outside the physical world the subject seeks to know In my naturalistic conception, knowing is a physical practice of engagement, and as with other physical processes, there should be an account of it within our scientific theory.

Central to my analysis is the agential realist understanding of matter as a dynamic and shifting entanglement of relations, rather than as a property of things.

Suppose we take the whole mass inside the visible Universe19 and determine its quantum wavelength. We can ask when this quantum wavelength of the visible Universe exceeds its size. The answer is when the Universe is smaller than the Planck length in size (10–33 cm), less than the Planck time in age (10–43 secs), and hotter than the Planck temperature (1032 degrees). Planck's units mark the boundary of applicability of our current theories. To understand what the world is like on a scale smaller than the Planck length we have to understand fully how quantum uncertainty becomes entangled with gravity.

What if we were to acknowledge that the nature of materiality itself, not merely the materiality of human embodiment, always already entails “an exposure to the Other”?

But then again, representations are not (more or less faithful) pictures of what is, but productive evocations, provocations, and generative material articulations or recon-figurings of what is and what is possible.

The history of Western epistemology displays great diversity and ingenuity in generating different kinds of epistemological and visualizing systems (Plato’s is not Descartes’s is not Kant’s is not Merleau-Ponty’s is not Foucault’s), but as long as representation is the name of the game, the notion of mediation—whether through the lens of consciousness, language, culture, technology, or labor—holds nature at bay, beyond our grasp, generating and regenerating the philosophical problem of the possibility of human knowledge out of this metaphysical quarantining of the object world.

Just as the importance of the body as a performance rather than a thing can hardly be overemphasized, so should we resist the familiar conception of spacetime as a preexisting Euclidean container (or even a non-Euclidean manifold) that presents separately constituted bodies with a place to be or a space through which to travel. “Position” is neither an absolute nor an a priori determinate feature of space. The spacetime manifold does not sit still while bodies are made and remade. The relationship between space, time, and matter is much more intimate. Spacetime itself is iteratively reconfigured through the ongoing intra-activity of the world.

Knowing is not a capacity that is the exclusive birthright of the human. The “knower” cannot be assumed to be a self-contained rational human subject, nor even its prosthetically enhanced variant. There is no res cogitans that inhabits a given body with inherent boundaries differentiating self and other. Rather, subjects are differentially constituted through specific intra-actions. The subjects so constituted may range across some of the presumed boundaries (such as those between human and nonhuman and self and other) that get taken for granted. Knowing is a distributed practice that includes the larger material arrangement. To the extent that humans participate in scientific or other practices of knowing, they do so as part of the larger material configuration of the world and its ongoing open-ended articulation.

Channeling experiences, like telepathy and other receptive psi, work differently. The information can be accessed consciously or unconsciously from one person to another. It also gets filtered through the pineal gland. The information packet (in the form of a light matrix) can go from one person to another. This can happen in a directed way. It also occurs unconsciously from people’s thought-forms. Like the heart waves resonate out from the physical heart, thought waves similarly have a signature. The missing piece is that the information is multidimensional. The information already exists layer upon layer upon layer. It is accessed, and there can be a directionality to it. When somebody intends to have information accessed in a specific way, it has directionality in time and space. They went on to say: So, we will see if that answered your question in any way. We know that you would love to have a simple answer, but there is not a simple answer. Each aspect of what you are calling psi, or the noetic experience, is done differently. It is like an infinite number of characteristics that come together. There is the person who is accessing. There is the being who may be transmitting or the information that is being received. There is the content of that. There is the situation. All of these come into play in terms of how it happens. So, there is no one solution. There are multiple solutions. It is not a force per se. It is not force-like; it is informational. And yet that information can manifest in a force-like way. There are force-like outcomes that come from the information. Incredibly, the information communicated in this session was similar to that received in our other studies. It is also noteworthy that some of what we see coming to light today about quantum entanglement, information theory, and our channeling experiments support what was said in my trance channeling session.

« Another way to look at how we humans and the quantum field are interconnected is through the concept of quantum entanglement, or quantum nonlocal connection. Essentially, once two particles can be initially linked in some way, they will always be bonded together beyond space and time. As a result, anything that is done to one will be done to the other even though they are spatially separated from one another. This means that since we too are made up of particles, we are all implicitly connected beyond space and time. What we do unto others, we do unto ourselves.  

quantum entanglement,” technically defined as a situation in which the quantum state of one particle cannot be described independently of the quantum state of another.

It's critical to have confidence that the unsharpness / uncertainty principle manifests on the macro scale, as well as the micro. It's excruciatingly painful to logically derive the existence of macro existence as independent of micro entanglement. Jungian synchronicity is another term for this entanglement. It is your imagination that is the central method of controlling these entangled states.

Quantum entanglement indicates everything and everyone is interconnected

To utilize the Mynt variable, one needs to understand expanded consciousness as it is a type of gateway that allows one to “think differently” about quantum entanglement to be able to timeline jump.

In a 1974 meeting of physicists and parapsychologists in Geneva, Switzerland, the French physicist Olivier Costa de Beauregard—the one who first proposed that quantum entanglement might be explained retrocausally—described the train of thought that led to his own ultimate acceptance of the probable existence of something like precognition: My starting point … occurred in 1951 when I suddenly said to myself: If you truly believe in Minkowski’s space-time—and you know you have to—then you must think of the relationship between mind and matter not at one universal or Newtonian instant but in space-time. If, by the very necessity of relativistic covariance, matter is time extended as it is space extended, then, again by necessity, awareness in a broad sense must also be time extended.69 It is very much like an updated version of Charles Howard Hinton’s reasoning about the brain’s capacity for four-dimensional thought: Our brains are four-dimensional, so our awareness must be as well.

Jungian synchronicity is another term for macro entanglement.

Intimacy is a Palomar knot, sometimes you are the hook and I am the fish and then we swap places. Call it quantum entanglement or an anomalous lucid dream, but today was the color of you, you were here, the afternoon by my knee.