Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Bandersnooty t1_je6bggx wrote

Does quantum entanglement and the apparent lack of time passing between cause and effect indicate the existence of something smaller than quarks (that facilitates a faster than quark speed of reaction)? If not how do theorists explain it?

1

Leemour t1_je6sywu wrote

It's just how the wavefunction predicts it. We are unfortunately not able to directly observe the wavefunction, so most statements one is tempted to make about its "true" nature are conjecture.

The quantum bomb experiment is even wonkier and still doesn't prove any "spooky action at a distance".

3

mfb- t1_je7sqpn wrote

The speed of light as speed limit for information transfer has nothing to do with the size of particles. You cannot transfer information faster than light, no matter which particles you use and no matter which particles exist, entanglement doesn't change that.

2

Bandersnooty t1_je7wp97 wrote

What I'm asking is whether or not it is possible that there is a form of energy so far undiscovered that registers at a quark or subquark level that can travel faster than light.

Light is the current known standard by which to measure speed, but photons are comprised of "bundles" in the electromagnetic field being transferred super fast from one point in the field to another point in the field.

"The field" itself is what I would like to know more about and understand its role in energy transfer.

Quarks are theoretical and considered so bc there isnt concrete physical evidence for them, but if thats the case, its entirely possible that there are even smaller units than quarks that are undetectable due to limits in current technology.

1

mfb- t1_je89fs0 wrote

> What I'm asking is whether or not it is possible that there is a form of energy so far undiscovered [...] that can travel faster than light.

That is possible, but it looks very unlikely. And it's not related to entanglement.

> that registers at a quark or subquark level

That part doesn't make sense.

> Light is the current known standard by which to measure speed, but photons are comprised of "bundles" in the electromagnetic field being transferred super fast from one point in the field to another point in the field.

No, the speed of causality is a far more fundamental concept. Light travels at that speed, and we call it "speed of light" for historical reasons, but the speed limit is much more general than light.

> "The field" itself is what I would like to know more about and understand its role in energy transfer.

The electromagnetic field? That's again not a question about entanglement.

> Quarks are theoretical and considered so bc there isnt concrete physical evidence for them

Are you commenting from the 1950s? That's a time where such a statement would have been reasonable. We have studied quarks routinely for decades now.

> its entirely possible that there are even smaller units than quarks that are undetectable due to limits in current technology.

That's unlikely but we cannot fully rule it out. But again, this has nothing to do with anything else in your comment.

1