psychic chess masters

Can you please repeat that in English for mere mortals ? I heard about Hugh Everett's theory and have seen the Matrix numerous times, but as I would have said in the 70's (when I had more hair), you are talking some mean heavy shit, man, get down and chill !

This is actually a vastly simplified version of the EPR paradox, looking at the wikipedia link would be worse.

I might have explained poorly, but the physics are complicated too.

I love Einstein's work. He always had such a fascination with light.

This topic seems to have largely evolved into a heated University BSc level intellectual debate, with a quantum mechanics degree required, between a guy in Scotland and one in the USA. I came back to this topic to find Bobby Fischer's biography buried in this lot. I suggest, Scottish guy - stick to making whisky and USA guy - stick to invading countries for their oil. Topic and thread closed.

Not closed, don't pretend to be a mod.

The fact that you do not understand something does not make it "university BS".

The national insults are not exactly welcomed either.

Time for a few insults when you arent busy opressing minorities.

who bothers with minorities, we used to oppress majorities over here

But, still, though there are parts of what you said that I don't understand, it seems that no matter how you try to spin it, the fact that there is that instantaneous relationship between the state of particles potentially clear across the universe from one another seems to suggest that there may be a modality where information and/or things can be conveyed, instantaneously 'appearing' at, if not traversing, vastly different locations, even if via some sort of super-ordinal placement or proxy.  I would therefore be extremely hesitant, in light of (no pun intended) the remote possibility (no pun intended) of something like that being true, to close the door (figuratively, as well as literally) on the potential viability of teleportation or psychic communication.  

In ancient Vedic (Hindu) literature - specifically, the world-renowned classic book, the Bhagavad Gita (e.g. the one Henry David Thorough was so impressed with), which refers to both the personal and non-personal (e.g. purely metaphysical) aspects of God ("Krishna"), says that, ultimately, the religious devotee and the scientist will arrive at the same realization.  Note: I would have said "conclusion" instead of "realization", but that could have been misinterpreted as death in a literal sense, which would have been correct, but isn't the kind of conclusion I was referring to.  Further, in Hinduism, death is not a final conclusion, but merely an transitory state, from the standpoint of the migrating 'soul' that trapped in the wheel of rebirth, until it attains final enlightement in the unborn state.

Anyway, science may wind up vindicating many so-called mystical ideas ultimately and vice versa.  As you can see, quantum physics (or should I say quantum psychics) and metaphysics seem to be reaching some agreement.  But what would be really interesting to see is, if there is something like an eternal soul, is it operating by the same quantum laws that subatomic particles are? And to learn whether or not the soul is actually some organization of quantum particles, or if subatomic particles are really just an aspect of consciousness.  And of course science can almost certainly never understand the deepest causes and nature of reality, consciousness or existence. Because rational concepts are, by definition finite and limited, and the deepest phenomena or nature of existance appears to be infinitely vast, ephemeral, and underlying.  A ROBOT is not likely really understand the nature and origin of everything about itself and its creator.  Any more than a single H20 molecule is likely to understand that it is the constituent of ocean or an ocean understand that it is an unthathomable aggregate of H20 molecules.

A subject for another day, perhaps... or not.

Information is not conveyed via entanglement.

Perhaps not in some sense, and yet, a rose by any other name is still arose or arrows.  I don't think you read what I wrote carefully (and who could blame you?  Well, I can, but I can also empathize with you and forgive you).  I referred to a super-ordinal position or proxy.  In other words some sort of transcendental or extra-dimensional location that obviates the notion of distance, and thus it isn't information at all.  But if that exists, then can that mode apply or be leveraged to appear to be transportation or information exchange?

I am pretty sure nobody knew about quantum physics when the Hindu religion was being created. Isn't it ironic that we create gods instead of the other way around?

Not in any sense.

Or so you say, but if the *effect* of transportation or telepathy can be achieved by leveraging the same underpinnings or position of quantum entanglement, good enough!

I think we'll find that the complexity of teleportation on a scale above the simplest of atoms, or maybe small molecules is presents an intractible problem.

The subject of telepathy I'll leave alone as it's probably pretty clear by now where I stand on it.

I don't find the problems entailed in organizing matter to facilitate teleportation intractible at all.  Do you have any information or idea at all about the true origin of consciousness or the relationship between quantum particles and consciousness? (You do know consciousness affects quantum particles, right?)  Because if you don't, you have no idea if quantum particles can be organized or managed in such a way as to facilitate telepathy or transportation.  Can you really assume that, depending on the relationship of consciousness and quantum particles, that one could not, potentially, through an act of will, along with unconscious connections or organizational ability, teleport or do telepathy?  I mean if we can perceive all kinds of super-complex things and visualize and perform all the incredible feats of every-day consciousness that we already do, why couldn't that hyper-organization occur at meta levels potentially?  

I admit, I have no tangible proof, and you shouldn't just accept the possibility of these things on blind faith.  I'm just saying that for you to assume you have enough data, perspective and awareness to make a strong conclusion to the contrary, from my position is just arrogance and ignorance on your part.  Just your hubris and obstinance and egocentricity.

I don't believe consciousness is a quantum property, but of course as with any position on consciousness, that is just a belief.

I think consciousness is an emergent property of feedback systems.  To very, very simple degree, the thermostat in my house has some minimal level of consciousness.  As the feedback systems increase in complexity and sophistication, so does the degree of consciousness.  I really do believe it's that simple.

Ooo, that was a bad idea, dude...

When  does it make the leap to self-awareness?

When does your thermostat start dreaming of electric sheep?

Also, interesting idea.  Reminds me of the evolution of the concept of evolution - wherein initially it was believed that natural selection soley accounts of the direction and evolution of things into these beautifully orchestrated beings, independent of will or consciousness.  Or so it was initially proposed, until they discovered the epigenome and started to discover how behavior and intent of the parents switched on and off genes, to modify the outcome of their progeny.

We don't really understand the relationship between consciousness with energy and matter, nor the true ultimate origin or cause of anything.  Therefore it's all a form of 'educated' speculation, assuming we can even be educated about some of the more insiduous components of the nature of things.  Therfore, the best position is an open mind, not excessive skepticism or certainty.  Every day I see some aspect of science overruling past certitudes of science.