we know that; Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs of particles are interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance...Einstein and others considered such behavior to be impossible, as it violated the local realist view of causality.
it is the biggest problem of Quantum entanglement;
to overcome this problem, i am proposing here a new principle
“identical particles (fermions, bosons) cannot occupy the same position”. If identical particles occupy the same position; they are entangled particles.
that is, Quantum Entanglement is the subject of assuming all particles are at same position though they are separated by large distance!
my assumption is correct or wrong is decided by an experiment or evidence.
evidence: if entangled particles communicate instantaneously, my assumption is absolutely correct and causality problem also solved.
for more details go through attached link....
i am requesting to all unique scholars please comment on this..
Article MODIFIED PAULI EXCLUSION PRINCIPLE
Surely, the first objective to overcoming the 'problem of causality' is to determine the cause. Is it correct to assume that the spin of a photon or particle is not conserved throughout its lifetime?
Define spin more correctly than at present by identifying the part played by the vacuum now that, generally, we concede that the vacuum is not simply empty space.
Recall that LIGO found gravity waves -- in nothingness??.?
Consider that electron-positron pairs are not created by1.02Mev photon but released from a pre-existing bound state, just as silver ions are released for a photographic image.
Check out the epola model of the vacuum state and consider spin as S or Z twist, not merely up or down. A Left-hand threaded stud is the same at both ends when turned over..
Entanglement is not a problem for causality, althought you know the value of some characteristic of a particle farther way than light can travel, there nothing you can do with this informatio that affects causality.
You might be interested in the perspective on Quantum Entanglement offered in the paper titled:
'Algorithmically Verifiable Logic vis a vis Algorithmically Computable Logic: Could resolving EPR need two complementary Logics?'
which was presented on 26'th June at the workshop on 'Emergent Computational Logics' at UNILOG'2015, 5th World Congress and School on Universal Logic, Istanbul University, Turkey.
https://foundationalperspectives.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/42_resolving_epr_unilog_2015_full_paper.pdf
The paper considers the hypothesis that the paradoxical element which surfaced as a result of the EPR argument---due to the perceived conflict implied by Bell's inequality between the, seemingly essential, non-locality required by current interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, and the essential locality required by current interpretations of Classical Mechanics---has more to do with the mathematics we use to represent the laws of nature, rather than with the nature of those laws.
The paper suggests that the anomalous philosophical issues underlying some current concepts of quantum phenomena---such as indeterminacy, fundamental dimensionless constants, conjugate properties, uncertainty, entanglement, EPR paradox, Bell's inequalities, and Schroedinger's cat paradox---merely reflect a lack of recognition that any mathematical language, which can adequately express and effectively communicate the laws of nature, may be consistent under two, essentially different but complementary and not contradictory, logics for assigning truth values to the propositions of the language, such that the latter are capable of representing---as deterministic---the unpredictable characteristics of quantum behaviour.
In other words, the anomalies dissolve if a physicist could cogently argue that:
(i) All properties of physical reality are deterministic, but not necessarily mathematically predetermined---in the sense that any physical property could have one, and only one, value at any time t(n), where the value is completely determined by some natural law which need not, however, be representable by algorithmically computable expressions (and therefore be mathematically predictable).
(ii) There are elements of such a physical reality whose properties at any time t(n) are determined completely in terms of their putative properties at some earlier time t(0). Such properties are predictable mathematically since they are representable by algorithmically computable functions. The values of any two such functions with respect to their variables are, by definition, independent of each other and must, therefore, obey Bell's inequality. The Laws of Classical Mechanics determine the nature and behaviour of such physical reality only, and circumscribe the limits of reasoning and cognition in any emergent mechanical intelligence.
(iii) There could be elements of such a physical reality whose properties at any time t(n) cannot be theoretically determined completely from their putative properties at some earlier time t(0). Such properties are unpredictable mathematically since they are only representable mathematically by algorithmically verifiable, but not algorithmically computable, functions. The values of any two such functions with respect to their variables may, by definition, be dependent on each other and need not, therefore, obey Bell's inequality. The Laws of Quantum Mechanics determine the nature and behaviour of such physical reality, and circumscribe the limits of reasoning and cognition in any emergent humanlike intelligence.
The logic and the mathematical language that admits such functions is detailed in a paper that is to appear in the December 2016 issue of 'Cognitive Systems Research', titled:
'The Truth Assignments That Differentiate Human Reasoning From Mechanistic Reasoning: The Evidence-Based Argument for Lucas' Goedelian Thesis'
https://foundationalperspectives.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/28_human_reasoning_v_mechanistic_reasoning_update.pdf
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Particle Physics