Subject: Big, big, BIG (science) news
Date: Wed Sep 28 05:34:41 2022
User: Kumquat-of-Conciliation
Message:Here's a bit of career advice, however - not that you'd take it.
Why not start a magazine ("journal" would be too presumptive) called "The Anti-Scientist" -- "Disproving Facts that have been known for a very long time." Lots of targets out there. Copernicus, Bohr, Einstein, Newton, Curie, Tesla, Galileo, Pasteur, and guys of that ilk need to be put in their place. There are actually people who have accepted that the earth is *flat*! And that man has walked on the moon! Madness!
Date: Wed Sep 28 06:37:08 2022
User: BuzzClik
Message:“Unqualified people are reporting things they haven't a clue about.”
True.
Date: Wed Sep 28 13:44:51 2022
User: Kumquat-of-Conciliation
Message: Clarification/correction: In case it's not obvious, should have been:
"There are actually people who have NOT accepted that the earth is *flat*!"
Date: Thu Sep 29 01:54:58 2022
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:Hmm, who is Möbius Probity?
Can’t be the smartest man on the planet as I’m guessing he’s a Faux News addict. .sigh
Date: Thu Sep 29 10:00:38 2022
User: BuzzClik
Message:Dr.B -- It's not that complicated. Our "friend" doesn't have a political agenda; it's personal.
He marauds among discussion boards looking for experts in various fields and tries to tear them down. He looks for someone embracing a consensus point of view (i.e., the existence of time) and throws out arguments from some credentialed curmudgeon taking the opposite side. Michael peppers his "reporting" with a generous number of insults directed at his targets. His tunes his arguments based on your response and never relents. For example, in the unlikely case that you agree with him, he accuses you of being demeaning or sarcastic. His greatest victory is when he kills an entire thread by creating a loud, ugly argument.
Gratefully, Mr. Fixit has assigned a moderator to this board to selectively cull individual posts that break the rules of the forum.
Date: Fri Sep 30 11:11:51 2022
User: outskirts
Message:And buzz assesses trolly posters (and nice ones such as myself) while he's at work.
Date: Fri Sep 30 18:35:54 2022
User: Klepp
Message:One-sided argumentation is rarely enjoyable for more than (the) one.
Date: Sat Oct 1 22:58:08 2022
User: redberet
Message:You're must have sensed that one coming Klepp.
Date: Sun Oct 2 00:46:18 2022
User: ix
Message:hey red
hey klepp
Date: Sun Oct 2 05:19:02 2022
User: redberet
Message:I saw this in my morning newspaper, it's a subscriber article so I pasted it here. it's interesting.
The most powerful digital camera ever built, now being assembled at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory at Stanford University, will create a vast panorama of space by taking snapshots of 20 billion galaxies – more than twice as many as there are people on Earth.
With 7,000 unique parts, it will be paired with a telescope “to survey the heavens, looking at every part of the available sky – not just once, but many times,” said Aaron Roodman, professor of particle physics and astrophysics at SLAC/Stanford and the program lead for the camera project.
Seven years in production, the $168 million camera project is almost finished. Next spring, it will be carefully loaded into a protective frame and tucked into a cargo container, then driven by truck to an awaiting 747 chartered jet at San Francisco International Airport for its trip to Chile’s Rubin Observatory. To prevent any collisions on the Peninsula’s crowded U.S. 101 freeway, the camera will be escorted by a car caravan.
“Right now, we’re trying to bring everything together and make everything work,” said Travis Lange, lead mechanical engineer. “This is when things get hard. It’s a little frenetic.”
The camera’s vision is so sharp that it could spot a golf ball from 15 miles away.
But what really matters is its persistence – and its reach.
Once in place, the camera will shoot photos of the entire southern celestial hemisphere. A joint project of the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy, the Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) project will take photos every 15 seconds – accumulating many images, every night, over 10 years.
Its time-lapsed photos will reveal changes in the sky, helping scientists detect exploding stars, stellar collisions, flying asteroids and galaxies that mysteriously dim and brighten. In real-time, it will alert scientists to these startling sights.
Once in place, the camera will shoot photos of the entire southern celestial hemisphere. A joint project of the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy, the Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) project will take photos every 15 seconds – accumulating many images, every night, over 10 years.
Its time-lapsed photos will reveal changes in the sky, helping scientists detect exploding stars, stellar collisions, flying asteroids and galaxies that mysteriously dim and brighten. In real-time, it will alert scientists to these startling sights.
The many photos also can be stacked atop one another, brightening objects so dim that they’d normally escape notice. The camera can spot objects 100 million times dimmer than those visible to the naked eye – a sensitivity that would let it see a candle from thousands of miles away.
The camera will also probe our own solar system, spotting an estimated six million objects – 50 times more than we can see today.
With a click of its giant shutter, the LSST camera can help answer even deeper questions: What is the universe made of? How do these ingredients interact with each other? Why is the universe evolving, and accelerating its expansion? Do the lumps of dark matter offer clues? And more.
“The discovery potential is fantastic,” said Steve Ritz, project scientist for the camera and a physics professor at UC Santa Cruz. “We want to find new things. We want to be surprised.”
Unlike the new James Webb Space Telescope, now drifting in space at a location beyond the moon, this camera will live here on Earth, gazing out from the clear, dry skies of Chile’s high Atacama Desert.
It differs from Webb in another key respect: It will study the entire sky, not a narrow swath. Each night, it will generate 20 terabytes of data.
And, unlike Webb, its data will be shared with everyone. It’s hard to get access to the Webb telescope; scientists must submit their proposals in a highly competitive process. In contrast, the LSST data “is public to the whole U.S. science community, as well as a certain number of international partners,” said Roodman.
Such data sharing “creates a crossroads where different people who have very different interests all work together, trading ideas,” said Ritz. “Crossroads, historically, are where great new things are made.”
The custom-built camera is a behemoth. The size of a small car, it weighs three tons.
It rests on its side at SLAC’s high-ceiling cleanroom, where workers wear gloves, Tyvek suits and booties to avoid introducing dust into the delicate machinery.
The telescope’s three giant mirrors, ranging in size from 11 to 25 feet across, will direct light to the camera.
The image comes into focus on the camera’s giant “focal plane” – which, like any digital camera, has sensors. The size of a sensor dictates the quality of a camera’s images. The sensor in a smartphone’s camera measures a few millimeters; in a professional DSLR, the sensor is 1.3 inches. By comparison, LSST sensors are 1.6 inches – and there are 189 of them, all stitched together into one giant mosaic.
The camera also has many more pixels than conventional cameras, further enhancing its images. A smartphone camera has about 20 million pixels. This camera has 3.2 billion.
“The larger it is, the more of the sky we can see,” said Roodman.
But the team faced a practical dilemma. The electronic “noise” of bouncing electrons in its sensors creates image distortion, said project scientist Yousuke Utsumi. To calm things down, the camera’s sensors must be chilled to minus-150 degrees Fahrenheit, using a special refrigeration system.
The camera’s coated glass filters are made of fused silica, free of impurities. Its shutter – triggered by hitting the “enter” on a keyboard – will be automated and computer-controlled.
How big are the images? According to SLAC, they’re so large that showing just one of them would require 378 4K high-definition TVs.
This creates a data transmission problem. Because of the size of each image file, and the need to send it quickly, the internet isn’t good enough. So SLAC will ship the data via thousands of miles of dedicated fiber optic cable.
Date: Mon Oct 3 06:37:34 2022
User: TNmountainman
Message:Well, this was well-deserved (and a bit overdue - but there can only be one actual award per year, even it's divided). In terms of things that don't have to do with space and cosmology, or I guess cell signaling and manipulation, this is a very very big deal. (Which is not to say those things are necessarily bigger, altho most would say so.) The discovery's not news, but the Max Planck guys, and Paabo in particular have just been beyond amazing in the work they've done - even in the years since then. It's hardly believable the things they've teased out. (Some I've reported on in this thread.) The whole Max Planck institute should probably share it, actually. Altho I don't think they do that kind of thing.
Link: Saabo, Max Planck Institute get Nobel for their DNA work
Date: Mon Oct 3 13:25:13 2022
User: outskirts
Message:It's a head game. I know what it's like to have it played on me.
The asterisks are used by most of us as a way to put an inflection on a word, such as using italics (slanted letters) or bolder letters.
Date: Wed Oct 12 23:44:57 2022
User: TNmountainman
Message:This is kinda anticlimactic.........but worth pointing out that now we've been able to measure the amount of deflection of Dimorphos. Big success.
Link: DART does its job splendidly
Date: Sat Oct 22 13:15:20 2022
User: joeygray
Message:How to figure the odds? Not only it has to be close, it also has to “aim” directly at us or we won’t even see it. These star collapses must be happening “all the time” for us to have observed nearly 2000 of them in 30 years.
Date: Sat Oct 22 14:48:43 2022
User: Klepp
Message:I think ripping off the ozone layer could cause global crop failure due to UV, that's what I supposed when I wrote "finished"--but I'll look further into it.
Date: Mon Dec 12 13:47:33 2022
User: Katya
Message:According to the NY Times Lawrence Livermore National Lab is about to announce a major achievement in fusion research. At the National Ignition Facility using lasers to start the fusion reaction they have exceeded an energy gain of 1 which means that the fusion reaction produced more energy than was used to start it.
If additional research proves successful this could eventually provide a new source of abundant energy.
Can we say "Hello, Nobel Prize?"
Date: Mon Dec 12 14:49:00 2022
User: Klepp
Message:This, I believe.
Link: Cold fusion
Date: Mon Dec 12 17:02:02 2022
User: TNmountainman
Message:I *wanted* so much to believe it in '89, but was appropriately skeptical, like most scientists. In fact........I *still* want to think it can happen "somehow, sometime", but ain't holding my helium breath.
@Katya..........I'd love to believe that will happen "somehow, sometime", too, but have grown much older waiting on it. It's *always* been 15 years out - and I mean for over 50 years. As I'm sure you know, the technological challenges are utterly immense. But if it could get done..............................the world would forever change (duh). If anybody does it, the folks at Lawrence Livermore would be among the top candidates in the world for making it happen. There's been some promising stuff in Europe, too, the last few years, but I don't remember the details.
And those last 3 sentences could have been written *exactly* the same way 30+ years ago.
But yeah, if they do it, take the "Nobel" name away and replace it with "Lawrence Livermore". LOL.
Date: Fri Feb 17 12:53:28 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Interesting(++!) new theory about dark energy and the expansion of the universe.
Here's the (main) actual journal article:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/acb704
Below I link a lay version, altho not very good at all. One might want to refresh one's memory of what "vacuum energy" is before delving into this. (It's a quantum thing, fascinating beyond description, and leads to some very wild wonderings.) That said..............IF IF IF this theory holds metaphorical water, it'll be a giant step towards understanding our universe (or possibly all of 'them'). And............IF IF IF this is true, or even semi-true, it will be a very elegant conceptualization of the solution to two vexing problems at the same time.
"We thus propose that stellar remnant black holes are the astrophysical origin of dark energy......."
I'll follow up this post with another that'll have a link better than the one below - sort of a mid-level discussion.
Link: The connection between black holes and dark energy??
Date: Fri Feb 17 12:58:25 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:As promised............a better, mid-level discussion of what all this means. NOTE -- this harkens back, and builds (somewhat) on my very first post that started this thread, with the LIGO proof of gravity waves.
Again, IF IF IF this turns out to be true (which will take quite a while to be accepted), it'll be gigantic news
Link: The connection between black holes and dark energy, version 2
Date: Fri Feb 17 14:07:09 2023
User: Kaos
Message:Yes, this really is BIG science news if it gets corroborated. It’s still at the pre-print stage as I understand it but all sorts of media are picking up on it starting a few days ago.
So, how big could this be? IMHO, there’s a chance it could be the biggest theory in physics in a decade or even in a century.
Date: Sat Feb 18 14:02:46 2023
User: sharoco
Message:Thank you for prompting me to look up the meaning of 'black holes' and 'dark energy'. I'm sure these terms are common linguistic currency with our young people. Interesting to (try to) consider mass, energy and time intervals on a scale that is beyond the imagination - I guess that what 'conceptual' is all about. ...that's IMHO
Date: Sat Feb 18 17:08:04 2023
User: Katya
Message:Just for an alternative opinion my daughter who is an astrophysicist and her colleagues say it's interesting but disagree with the black hole theory and think it shows a misunderstanding of general relativity. I guess we shall see what others think.
Date: Sat Feb 18 18:40:21 2023
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:FWIW, I read pretty much the entire paper (really dense as you might expect) and it’s really missing lots of meat. The math works out on the theory that old super-massive black holes could gain their size by coupling to the expansion of the universe but no (reasonable?) explanation that explains how they get the mass to go along with it. Maybe like saying pre-Einstein that stars burn so long because mass and energy have some connection but not including e = mc^2 in your paper.
Date: Sat Feb 18 19:06:13 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:I read virtually all of it, too, before posting those posts. Yes, certainly lots of 'splainin' to do, and massive questions and problems to explore. But I thought they did a reasonably good job of theorizing were the mass comes from. And I guess it's *kinda* like your Einstein analogy in that nobody has a handle yet on how to calculate vacuum energy. I mean, that's such an extremely esoteric and foreign-to-common-sense concept, after all.
Would be interested in learning at bit more about your daughter's opposing viewpoint, Katya.
Date: Sat Feb 18 20:17:24 2023
User: Katya
Message:TN, she sent me the following reference which is a fairly general discussion of the controversy.
https://www.science.org/content/article/dark-energy-supermassive-black-holes-physicists-spar-over-radical-idea
The link as written above with the three periods after it won't work. For some reason the link keeps getting truncated after I post it. Instead of the three periods type in
-radical-idea
The Robert Wald referred to in the article wrote the canonical book on general relativity.
Date: Tue Feb 21 13:46:24 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Finally made time to read through that article. Most of it is a re-statement of the theory (understandable since many readers wouldn't be otherwise aware of it). As to Wald.........."He questions how an orb of pure dark energy could be stable." Ok.............but I don't think the authors are claiming that. In fact, black holes are kinda self-contained (barring collisions with other black holes, giant stars, etc.). To me, his best objection is the argument about total mass of all the black holes of the universe. I see his point, but I also would say that we *really* don't know the mass of those black holes with great certainty. We have no idea how many black holes are out there. He says they constitute less than 5% of the mass of the universe. I've never seen that value asserted (not that I necessarily would have). Not to mention, there is vacuum energy (at least quantum mechanics/physics implies that) everywhere in space - doesn't reside only in black holes - altho this idea doesn't assert that's part of the solution, as I read it.
Would like to hear Wald's response to Farrah and Croker's evidence concerning the "k factor" ("coupling strength") they described. I think it's brilliant how they chose the population of elliptical galaxies for this study, especially since now we can measure lots of different galaxies of a wide range of ages. The data seems strong, IF their theory is valid. And the fact that Croker and Joel Weiner had *predicted* that k value of 3 four years ago is amazing. (And if it turns out to be true, of course.)
So..................no way to know the answer to this for a while, and I myself would be in the "show me more" camp, but I still think it's an elegant idea, that **could** change astronomy and astrophysics forever. Just the very idea they've proposed will certainly lead to more investigations and thoughts going forward - and that's exciting within itself. And remember..............the Dark Energy Survey is ongoing as we type. Although that likely won't provide a definitive answer, it will be interesting to see how that may or may not line up with this data.
[disclaimer: I'm not an astrophysicist, but am fairly well-versed in these matters, without "doing the math".]
Date: Tue Feb 21 14:47:38 2023
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:My biggest objection to string theory was that it relied on the universe really being N-dimensional where N was some double-digit number. I think originally N was around 20 but various versions got it down to 11. My gut reaction was you could probably find some version of N that worked out with some flavor of strings but that didn’t make it believable to me.
I’m starting to have the same issues here. The math works out when all the super-massive black holes from the early universe “couple” with the expansion of the universe around the same time but all SMBH’s were not created equal so what would cause this coupling to happen at the same time?
And, of course, since most of the mass-energy of the universe is dark energy (68%) while visible matter/energy is just 5% - and black holes a fraction of that - where is the explanation for why a fraction of dark energy would be contained in them?
The one good thing about this theory is that it is out-of-the-box thinking plus plausible. Perhaps it will influence other Astro-physicists to be more creative too.
Date: Wed Feb 22 01:57:07 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Dr. Bombay:
"The math works out when all the super-massive black holes from the early universe “couple” with the expansion of the universe around the same time but all SMBH’s were not created equal so what would cause this coupling to happen at the same time?"
It doesn't/hasn't all happened at the same time. That's the beauty of them using the galaxies they did, with different ages.
"The researchers found that the further back in time they looked, the smaller the black holes were in mass, relative to their masses today."
[AND...........] "The team examined five different black hole populations in three different collections of elliptical galaxies, taken from when the universe was roughly one half and one third of its present size.
Date: Wed Feb 22 02:39:57 2023
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:Tn, if I look at the graph in section 3.2. Figure 3.2, it looks like this coupling magically takes place 12.2 billion years ago (12.2 gya as annotated). Why is the age of those early galaxies relevant? The SMBH’s at their centers will be widely different in mass. Why do they all “couple” then? I’m not sure why you think the age difference makes the theory more compelling. To me it makes it less so. Where is the explanation of why this happened ~12.2 gya? Oh, it makes the math work with known data about the history of the universe. Nice. But, no explanation as to why that I can see in the article.
Date: Wed Feb 22 02:56:11 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:I don't see a figure 3.2 within section 3.2 - only figure 2. (And I'm assuming you're referencing the actual journal article.)
Date: Wed Feb 22 03:36:01 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Too fatigued to give a fuller response, but as I read it, the closer (younger) galaxies are larger, and (in their theory) they got that way by vacuum energy becoming mass over time, not be accretion, relative to the more distant (older) galaxies. And this can be represented on a continuum, the 'rate' of which is their calculated cosmological constant. Perhaps more tomorrow................
Date: Wed Feb 22 13:32:13 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Well..........Webb *may* have thrown yet another wrinkle into all this. Of course we can't tell if these are elliptical galaxies or what, and the data from them may be too sketchy to include - at least for now.
The article in "Nature":
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05786-2
Ain't it great to be alive with all this stuff being discovered?!
Link: Can you see me now?
Date: Wed Feb 22 22:22:39 2023
User: Kaos
Message:Newton’s theory of gravity was published in 1687 but had noted shortcomings (the precession of the orbit of the planet Mercury) not soon after. It took a deuce and a quarter centuries before Einstein came along and straightened the whole thing out. Now we have the dilemmas of galaxies that spin too fast and galaxies that fly apart too quickly to resolve. The expectation is that new stuff is discovered waaaay faster than before. But, maybe that’s not going to happen in this case. Perhaps we will need a million years of observations with instruments far more powerful than what we have now to noodle out a new theory that explains the above. Maybe Lord Kelvin was right, if he’d been born a century later.
Date: Wed Feb 22 22:56:52 2023
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:Tn, back on the topic of the hot coupling paper, here’s something else that just occurred to me. How can you be claiming being 99.98% accurate when using observations that are at best ~95% accurate (the values for the expansion rate of the universe falling in the range 67-73). Sloppy.
It’s a seductively simple theory but - I can’t see any meat.
Date: Sun Feb 26 03:34:39 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Dr. B, I just haven't made time to dig back into this stuff, but the 99.98% really struck me when I first read the paper. What is that, 7 or 8 or more standard deviations? But it's less clear what they're actually claiming there. I think they're claiming with that degree of certainty that they're eliminating accretion as the cause of the mass increases. I think. Which just seems outrageously high (as it apparently did to you, too). They use a 90% confidence interval for k = 3.11, but with big error bars. I still plan on tackling it again, but have a hard time devoting concentration to it. In the meantime...................Michio Kaku thinks they're enormous black holes, not galaxies. Skip ahead to about 1:30 to get to him and his comments.
Link: those old galaxies may be black holes?
Date: Fri Mar 10 04:39:37 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:I thought about posting this new advance in superconductivity here, but decided to not do so because it was still too early to fully understand it, and was then gonna put it in the "random posts" thread, but then I realized it's actually pertinent here, because it piggybacks - or actually tacks onto - our earlier discussion from 2020 about superconductivity advances. Go to this thread, Oct. 14th, to see a link provided by Klepp about (purported) superconductivity at room temperature. That paper was actually withdrawn by "Nature" on Sept. 22nd last year, due to questions about methodology, etc. (One can see the note addressing that by clicking on his link again.)
So now this same group, out of Rochester (combination of U. of R. and private companies), has a 'new and improved' paper in the brand-new edition of "Nature". This is pretty dense, and they don't fully understand exactly what they've made yet. For example, they don't even know the stoichiometry (that's the ratio different atoms combine in to make a compound) of this stuff. Not surprising that it's a hydride, but that's still weird stuff. This is kinda a wide-open field, so we'll see where all this leads. The combinations of rare-earth metals, with hydrogen, and who knows what all else into these exotic materials is "gender-bending", if I may apply that term to making "alloys of hydrogen" (who'd a-thunk?). ("N-doped" just means that some nitrogen had been injected into the mix, but even they don't know how that fits into the picture.)
Here's the link to the original article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05742-0 (One can at least read the abstract.)
Here's a companion article from the same edition with "commentary":
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00599-9
And below is a (once again poorly-written) lay 'explanation' of it.
Link: ".....a new era..........of superconducting materials"?
Date: Fri Mar 10 15:58:47 2023
User: Klepp
Message:Hopefully we find tons and tons of it.
Link: Lutetium
Date: Sun Mar 12 16:59:04 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Yet another 'exotic' theory - this one concerns the possible origin of dark matter. Pretty wild idea, but would actually "de-couple" the origin theories of regular and dark matter, thus making less strenuous the difficulties in 'splaining how they both (ostensibly) occurred at the same time. Could there have been a separate "Big Bang" for dark matter with different quantum processes at work? Cool idea, right? And rather than being purely only an idea, they propose a way to test the theory (gravitational waves) by measuring pulsar timing. (And I admit that I haven't studied mechanistically how that could/would be done.)
[Side note: Cornell, for those with short memories, was where Carl Sagan hung out.]
Link: Was there a separate "Dark Big Bang"?
Date: Wed Mar 15 05:18:43 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:More brilliant work by the group at Max Planck. An amazingly comprehensive study of the movements of the various populations across Europe (mostly) from about 45,000 years ago to about 8,000 years ago. There will be more where this came from, literally and figuratively, as the techniques to extract DNA from cave sediments keeps getting better and better. This theory will have to grow and be tweaked as more data is available, but this sets up a framework to allow more pieces of the puzzle to be integrated into the picture. Big step forward..............into the past.
(The article jailbreaks pretty easily.)
Link: varieties and admixtures of ancient European DNA
Date: Wed May 3 17:09:54 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Yet again the Max Planck team pushes the boundaries of what's possible with ancient DNA. This is just incredible. An elk tooth pendant from - yes - the famous Denisova Cave, yields what a year or two ago would have been thought impossible.
And I went and found a lay version for those who want/need it:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pendant-is-20000-years-old-ancient-dna-shows-who-wore-it-2023-05-03/
Link: ancient human DNA successfully extracted from a *pendant*
Date: Wed May 3 20:03:15 2023
User: Klepp
Message:I want to clone my best (canine) friend I lost last year...easy enough to find his DNA floating around here somewhere.
Date: Thu May 4 02:45:36 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:Cloning a dog is possible - and is even being done. Best to have actual tissue, tho. Not sure whether hair, etc. will work. Maybe not from a commercial enterprise. But such info is "out there", if by chance you're serious.
Date: Thu May 4 04:13:57 2023
User: Klepp
Message:Odd to think how simple it'll likely be less than a century or so from now...take a trip to the mid-21st-century vet/breeder, pick your pup (or bring your own deceased canine's double helix)...come back in whatever the gestation time is for canines, and bring home a newborn to nurse (more likely, let the vet's associates do the nursing, weaning, other tough puppy stuff...taking your bundle home at two months old or so (after much joyful visitation)...
Date: Fri May 12 15:56:06 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:It remains to be seen how this will play out as 'time' goes by..........but it's a fascinating development. Quantum entanglement at a distance (yeah, we know about that) -- but faster than the speed of light. Yes, it's been theorized, but to my knowledge, this is the first solid proof.
Here's the "Nature" link:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05885-0
"One of the astounding features of quantum physics is that it contradicts our common intuitive understanding of nature following the principle of local causality. This concept derives from the expectation that the causes of an event are to be found in its neighbourhood."
So I think we now have serious evidence that when the dealer here deals me a hard deal, he's *simultaneously* giving others far away an easy one, just to even things out - or just to be cruel. Choose your own interpretation. :) Can we call it "dealing entanglement" here?
Link: quantum entanglement at a distance - but faaaast.....
Date: Fri May 12 17:01:32 2023
User: Klepp
Message:(Fascinating, but tough for me to follow as I'd like).
I think this is what's being refined to levels now talked of (mid-double digit ns) in TN's link:
Link: Delayed-choice quantum eraser
Post follow-up