I've seen before and especially now that there is growing support for a theory of wormholes to describe entanglement (even though Hawking showed they can't exist???). But, this makes no sense to me, because you don't need worm holes at all. I thought that you could describe entanglement merely as the correlation of probability and position as particles translated, correlation is independent of time and space so particles will be entangled for however long the correlation that they are the same particle can hold true. It is the same exact principal with the change in position of electrons. When an electron gains energy in an atomic orbital, it instantaneously at infinitely faster than light speed changes from one orbital to the next and all without traveling through the intervening space because at the instantaneous moment an electron has enough energy, the only position it can logically have without violating it's own logical properties of existence and having it's own wave-function become in a way cause destructive interference with itself and have it's existence essentially leak out of itself is it if has a specific orbital that is in a higher potential. Now, this does not actually violate relativity because information is not actually traveling between two points, it's still the same electron, and in any case the force carrier particles and associated photons still travel at the speed of light. But anyway, because there is no amount of time an electron in an atomic system can exist in continuous space yet we clearly see electrons existing, the only way an electron doesn't already cause it's own existence to leak out of itself is by instantaneously having the position from the nucleus that would allow the quantized "resonance" frequency of it's oscillation to actually completely indefinite cycles of oscillation without creating destructive interference at the very instantaneous moment it possesses the energy to move to the next energy level. Which, is similar to stating that the electron transitions at infinite speed because it's not actually traveling speed, rather it's probability over space is merely correlating to a different number, and a correlation is independent of time and is "always" true, 1+1=2 is a true statement at technically infinite speed, but that's not an actual way to describe it, 1+1=2 has always been a true statement. Yet, we don't have wormholes to describe electron orbital transitions, so why for entanglement?