Recent content by jeffn1

My impression is, at a quantum level, all fundamental "particles" are really waves. According to Quantum Field Theory, all fundamental particles are merely excitations of their underlying quantum field. But, I tend to think there is a better case for viewing fundamental particles as...

Yes, the concept I would throw out is that, perhaps, the entangled particles retain their same relationship to their underlying (and non-local) quantum field. So, even when they are separated by billions of miles, their spins (for example) would retain the same relationship to their underlying...

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I was responding to Bhobba's statement ("I would say entanglement is an easier concept to understand in Quantum Field Theory (QFT)....", quoted more fully, below). He seems to think that QFT does help explain entanglement, and that seems to make sense to...

Would the statement that the two entangled particles retain the same relationship to their underlying quantum field be consistent with your view? To me, that is a nice explanation for quantum entanglement without any issues about faster than speed of light communication, etc.

Thank you. Have you read the article? It is very mainstream. It is by no means "personal speculation or personal theory development".

I received an email requesting that I introduce myself. Although I did not study physics, I have a pretty strong background in the philosophy of science, which was the subject of my undergraduate thesis at Wesleyan University. I am a practicing lawyer (University of Virginia). [Off topic...