Any result that conflicts with the below theory of entanglement?

[San K]

1. Entanglement happens, in some dimension, "outside" space and time

2. Whenever we observe a particle, we pull it back into space and time.

Photon travels outside space and time, however when we try to observe it, we pull it back into space and time.

3. Also when we pull a particle back into space and time...it can randomly/statistically appear anywhere into that small region (cloud).

4. information can be transmitted via this dimension, however it is lost when the particle is pulled back into space and time, due to 3 above.

5. thus particle ...in space and time
wave...outside space and time* particle = electron = photon
so when the particle/photon hits the detector...it moves

from outside space-time

back into

space time...

Any observations in quantum mechanics or classic ...that show results that conflict with above hypothesis?

 

[DrChinese]

If you make your description vague enough, you can always make it seem like it fits with existing experiments. Howsa 'bout something specific? Where does it go when it goes outside of spacetime? Can we see that place? Can you use your ideas to make an experimentally falsifiable prediction? Or is this just an ad hoc hypothesis?

 

[maverick_starstrider]

1. Entanglement happens, in some dimension, "outside" space and time

2. Whenever we observe a particle, we pull it back into space and time.

Photon travels outside space and time, however when we try to observe it, we pull it back into space and time.

3. Also when we pull a particle back into space and time...it can randomly/statistically appear anywhere into that small region (cloud).

4. information can be transmitted via this dimension, however it is lost when the particle is pulled back into space and time, due to 3 above.

5. thus particle ...in space and time
wave...outside space and time


* particle = electron = photon
so when the particle/photon hits the detector...it moves

from outside space-time

back into

space time...

Any observations in quantum mechanics or classic ...that show results that conflict with above hypothesis?

I'd just bring up Occum's Razor, given two theories of equal predictive power the simpler one (or the one that requires the fewest variables) should be favored. Ultimately all we can ever know about the structure of the universe is the results we get from an experiment. If you want to say that in between experiments electrons are out having a beer with unicorns and leprechauns that's not really a falsifiable theory any more than saying that when you buy a box of cereal at the grocery store, inside that box exists a pocket dimension of wonder and adventure, of course every time you open that box there's just cereal in there, but it COULD BE TRUE. Of course there's absolutely zero reason to favor it over any other theory you can concoct. Thus we stick with the most logical, if there's cereal in there when we open it there was cereal in there just BEFORE we opened it. Unless an alternate theory can actually make a PREDICTION which is different than the old then it's considered pretty much useless.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

1. Entanglement happens, in some dimension, "outside" space and time

2. Whenever we observe a particle, we pull it back into space and time.

Photon travels outside space and time, however when we try to observe it, we pull it back into space and time.

3. Also when we pull a particle back into space and time...it can randomly/statistically appear anywhere into that small region (cloud).

4. information can be transmitted via this dimension, however it is lost when the particle is pulled back into space and time, due to 3 above.

5. thus particle ...in space and time
wave...outside space and time


* particle = electron = photon
so when the particle/photon hits the detector...it moves

from outside space-time

back into

space time...

Any observations in quantum mechanics or classic ...that show results that conflict with above hypothesis?

Also I think your 3 is coming from a lack of understanding of what Heisenberg's Uncertainy means. In reality it's not even a quantum statement, it's really just a statement about waves. It doesn't say that particles are little points (billiard balls) whose location is mysteriously not pinned down at any moment, it simply says that particles are waves, and all waves (water waves, sound waves, etc) have the relation between positional confinement and momentum (wavenumber) given by Heisenberg's. In other words, if you accept that particles are described by wavefunctions (or more accurately are local disturbances of quantum fields) and not points there's really nothing mysterious happening

 

[billschnieder]

1. Entanglement happens, in some dimension, "outside" space and time
...

there is no experimental evidence supporting anything such as "outside space-time", nor is it possible to falsify such an idea in an actual experiment so it is a non-starter.

Any observations in quantum mechanics or classic ...that show results that conflict with above hypothesis?

I could start a new theory by basing it on the hypothesis of "a tiny rock on the surface of Jupiter with red and greed stripes" and ask the question, "Is there any observations in quantum mechanics or classic ...that show results that conflict with above hypothesis?". What you did is not different.