[mikema63]

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-ticker/confirmed-quantum-mechanics-weird?tgt=nr

The study shows that an experimenter who measures the spin of an electron can effectively predict what the spin of the electron’s entangled partner will be when measured. That success persists even when both measurements are completed before a light-speed signal could travel between the particles, which violates a principle called locality.

They apparently demonstrated a loophole free bell test.

Researchers successfully transmitted information across entangled particles while using a light speed signal. It's aparently still not considered possible to do so without the light speed signal for reasons I don't really understand.

Harvard also created a meta material with a refractive index of zero, which was described in the article as allowing light to go "infinitly fast" while going through it. I don't really understand that either but it sounds cool.

http://www.engadget.com/2015/10/22/harvard-creates-a-material-that-lets-light-go-infinitely-fast/

[Noelnada]

Researchers successfully transmitted information across entangled particles while using a light speed signal. It's aparently still not considered possible to do so without the light speed signal for reasons I don't really understand.

No it just shows that information do travel faster than light and that classical physics such as locality principle were wrong.

If the information in that article is correct.

[Potemkin]

Information is not being transmitted faster than light. The collapse of the wavefunction can propagate faster than light, but that is a random process and can convey no actual information. Doing so would violate local causality, a fundamental principle of relativity theory.

[KlassWar]

Let's violate all them principles without mercy: A future that doesn't include a Red Navy liberating the furthest corners of the Multiverse ain't one I wanna live in.

[mikema63]

Doing so would violate local causality, a fundamental principle of relativity theory.

Is causality less inviolable than locality? I honestly don't know.

[Decky]

But what is the application to bricklaying?

[Potemkin]

Is causality less inviolable than locality? I honestly don't know.

Causality is all that matters. Who cares if 'locality' is violated? Space is merely a Kantian form of thought anyway, a mental construct. Theoretically speaking, only causality matters.

[mikema63]

Atoms are very tiny bricks.

Causality is all that matters. Who cares if 'locality' is violated. Space is merely a Kantian form of thought anyway, a mental construct. Theoretically speaking, only causality matters.

And if causality is just our perception of time not the reality?

[Potemkin]

The limit of the speed of light is merely the limit of the speed with which causality can propagate. The quantum entanglement cannot permit the propagation of causality faster than light, merely the collapse of the wavefunction, which is random and cannot communicate any information. This allows us to keep special relativity, while still allowing the collapse of the wavefunction to occur instantaneously across the entire universe.

[mikema63]

Does causality propagate at the speed of light because light is the fastest thing, or does light travel at the speed of causality because it's the fastest thing?

[Potemkin]

I'm not sure that question can be meaningfully answered. In my view, the speed of light can best be thought of as a constant of proportionality between space and time. Time is a dimension of space in the sense that it is related to the space axes of the manifold by the factor i*c, where i is the square root of -1 and c is the speed of light. The speed of light is merely the factor which makes space and time commensurate with each other.

[Decky]

And where do the bricks come into it?

[Noelnada]

Doing so would violate local causality, a fundamental principle of relativity theory.

It sounds like an archaic theory to me

In my view, the speed of light can best be thought of as a constant of proportionality between space and time

I don't see why light should be seen as such. Honestly

I don't see how the universe or reality itself could be held together if the speed of light is the maximum speed regarding information transferts.

It's very slow

[KlassWar]

And where do the bricks come into it?

When you're building the facilities that house the particle accelerators in which the experiments are performed.

They're on the big side, which means plenty bricks.

[Decky]

That is good. At least these particle experiments can do something valuable to the human race then.

[Potemkin]

I don't see why light should be seen as such. Honestly

There's nothing particularly special about light as such. It just happens to be the most common massless particle in the universe. Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light. It's just that light was, for obvious reasons, important in the development of Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, and in Einstein's theory of relativity. It's just the way science developed, historically.

I don't see how the universe or reality itself could be held together if the speed of light is the maximum speed regarding information transferts.

It's very slow

Space and time are a kind of Platonic metaxy - they both separate and connect objects and events. The finite speed of light keeps everything from being in the same place at once, and it prevents everything from happening at once.

[Noelnada]

It just happens to be the most common massless particle in the universe. Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light

Well, but there may be tachyons and ways to transfer informations faster than light using quantum entanglements. Our science is very recent and we only begin to dig further than these classical theories.

I don't trust old theories for staying forever valid and i trust future researches, experimentations and theories to always further our understanding and always surprise us.

Of course it's wise to not take "faster than light" as granted either.

You got my point i hope.

[Potemkin]

Well, but there may be tachyons and ways to tranfer informations faster than light using quantum entanglements. Our science is very recent and we only begin to dig further than these classical theories.

Certainly, almost anything is possible.

I don't trust old theories for staying forever valid and i trust future researches, experimentations and theories to always further our understanding and always surprise us.

Of course it's wise to not take "faster than light" as granted either.

You got my point i hope.

Indeed. Science is an open-ended quest for knowledge; it's not a set of religious dogmas. Nothing in science is set in stone.

[Decky]

Dialectal materialism! You forget yourself sir!

[Frollein]

Causality is all that matters.

Let's contemplate synchronicity as an acausal connecting principle for a moment...