Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Sylvia Else Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Faster than the speed of light Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:20:35 +1100 Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <2a4a52fc-3b33-40c3-bf79-5dff5eabf9bb@googlegroups.com> <2395916.ujK87JK2CX@PointedEars.de> <2968108.JjNB03i3lN@PointedEars.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net UBqEdT7D/vZwB5mkhYvvwwCFsPlMbwkGSJdgPY/8hSL/F5vBV3 Cancel-Lock: sha1:2RV5Fq5IgbJaNk6RR3he8RWxosk= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <2968108.JjNB03i3lN@PointedEars.de> Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:371263 On 2/12/2015 8:42 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 1/12/2015 5:41 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 28/11/2015 11:36 PM, Omar Shabsigh wrote: >>>>> But now, an experiment at Delft University of Technology in the >>>>> Netherlands suggests that the great man's objections >>>>> notwithstanding, spooky action at a distance is real. >>>> No, no, no! The experiment verifies entanglement, and few in the >>>> scientific community would have expected it not to. But that's all. >>>> "Spooky action at a distance" is a hypothetical mechanism behind >>>> entanglement for which there is not only no evidence at all, […] >>> Utter nonsense. Quantum entanglement was experimentally confirmed in at >>> least six experiments already. Einstein’s derision of it as “spooky >>> action at [a] distance” (1935) became obsolete in 1984 with Bennett’s and >>> Brassard’s BB84 at the latest. >> >> What was it about "The experiment verifies entanglement" that you found >> difficult to follow? >> >> Or did you only read as far as "No, no, no!"? > > Oh for crying out loud, it’s the (crack)pot calling the kettle black again. > > “Spooky action at a distance” is _not_, different from what you stated, “a > hypothetical mechanism behind entanglement for which there is not only no > evidence at all […]”. Instead, it is Einstein’s derision of the very idea > of quantum entanglement. However, quantum entanglement was experimentally > confirmed later (after Einstein’s death). > You seem to be assuming that "spooky action at a distance" is the same as entanglement. It's not. Entanglement is a predicted correlation between measurements. Nothing more. Sylvia.