Recent content by aletheia

Yes, I did and it was insightful. Even though I might not have been able to express me as clearly as I expected, your help along with the help from the other members has been very enlightening for my understanding of quantum mechanics. Nevertheless, I’ll stop trying to push it further into my...

@Matterwave @bhobba From the Bertelsmann’s Socks and the Nature of Reality we have two useful images that I have edited to better illustrate my question. First: brings the assumption that at the preparation both particles are physically separated — meaning that they would have lost their...

@Matterwave @bhobba Thanks to you, we're closer to what I was actually asking. “EPR made an implicit assumption in their argument that indeed you can stop the two particles from interacting with each other eventually. If the interaction never stops, their argument (that QM is incomplete)...

@PeterDonis @Matterwave They state that the systems interact until T, “[...] let us suppose that we have two systems, I and II, which we permit to interact from the time t =0 to t=T, after which time we suppose that there is no longer any interaction between the two parts.. [...]”, without...

As far as I can understand, in quantum entanglement, it seems to be assumed that the preparation of the entangled particles would physically disconnect them at the origin, therefore, creating the necessity for an additional explanation for their remaining correlation, which Einstein termed as...

In experiments with entangled systems, the two subsystems can clearly become spatially separated and operationally distinguishable: they propagate to different locations, can be addressed by different apparatuses, and eventually produce separate local detection records. For example, Hensen et...

I understand. My bad. I apologize. It won’t happen again.

Understood. Yes I’m getting used to the forum. Now I understand that I may provide links to mainstream well established articles — I’ll remember next time. Now I think I finally fully understood where my interpretations weren’t precise. Thanks for the attention and for the patience.

I do very much appreciate your time, attention and patience (and all the users that have engaged in the thread). I have surely increased significantly both my understanding of fundamentals of QM and the mindset of physicists. If I’m here “annoying” physicists is quite exactly the forum’s goal...

I may simply be misunderstanding one point in Rauch et al. (2018); they wrote: “Using the wavelength of cosmic photons to implement the measurement settings requires the assumption that the wavelength of each photon was set at emission” [1]. in the same experimental description, however, the...

I have know saw it indeed — it’s quite good. Thanks. actually, for the sake of my understanding at least, neither quantum entanglement nor quantum coherence shouldn’t be out of scope for Quantum Theory Foundations. as a physician working at ER, I apply exclusively evidence based medicine; I...

I don’t think so. That response wasn’t even about the content of this nice thread — that was a response from the (well) deleted comment from another user who posted a paper not mainstream physics. That aside, we’re pretty much understanding (slowly but surely) each others. I think that the...

Im not the one obsessed with semantics. Im speaking about an obvious causal relation between emission and absorption of “it”. Could you please explain what you are having difficulty understanding about “it”?

Exactly! Whatever the formalism calls “that which is radiated”, it originates from a physical change in a material source, develops as an extended/wave-like electromagnetic structure through the apparatus, and eventually terminates in another interaction with material matter at the detector. So...

No! Your comment means that you (and others, since it’s not the first time…) believe that you can disprove an argument without knowing the argument — which, from a medical perspective, is delusional (Im not saying that you are delusional and I don’t mean to offend, I make this reservation...