<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PEAR lab (Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research) &#8211; REDUX &#8211; Retrocausality in physics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.midasoracle.org/2006/11/18/pear-lab-princeton-engineering-anomalies-research-redux-retrocausality-in-physics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2006/11/18/pear-lab-princeton-engineering-anomalies-research-redux-retrocausality-in-physics/</link>
	<description>Prediction Markets, etc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:13:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crosbie Fitch</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2006/11/18/pear-lab-princeton-engineering-anomalies-research-redux-retrocausality-in-physics/#comment-196</link>
		<dc:creator>Crosbie Fitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Nov 2006 14:20:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2006/11/18/pear-lab-princeton-engineering-anomalies-research-redux-retrocausality-in-physics/#comment-196</guid>
		<description>My hunch is simply that there is no temporality to entanglement whatsoever - that&#039;s being confused with apparent superluminal signalling.

Firstly no-one has yet demonstrated that entanglement can convey any information, only that instantaneously correlated measurements can be made at a distance.

Secondly, an apparent ability for conference to occur faster than light doesn&#039;t consequently demonstrate anything is actually travelling at that speed.

Thirdly, instantaneous signalling, even if it was possible (and jolly useful for space exploration), might upset some theory, but it doesn&#039;t mean that we can change history or see into the future.

Fourthly, one could imagine entangled particles as if they were a single entity visible in separate locations, i.e. no material separation, simply the physical illusion of this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My hunch is simply that there is no temporality to entanglement whatsoever &#8211; that&#8217;s being confused with apparent superluminal signalling.</p>
<p>Firstly no-one has yet demonstrated that entanglement can convey any information, only that instantaneously correlated measurements can be made at a distance.</p>
<p>Secondly, an apparent ability for conference to occur faster than light doesn&#8217;t consequently demonstrate anything is actually travelling at that speed.</p>
<p>Thirdly, instantaneous signalling, even if it was possible (and jolly useful for space exploration), might upset some theory, but it doesn&#8217;t mean that we can change history or see into the future.</p>
<p>Fourthly, one could imagine entangled particles as if they were a single entity visible in separate locations, i.e. no material separation, simply the physical illusion of this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

