Coulombo's law demands that every chili dish requires a hot, spicy gravytation...
That is, it is the nonlocal interaction of objects that are separated in space.
This term was used most often in the context of early theories of gravity and electromagnetism to describe how an object responds to the influence of distant objects.
For example, Coulomb’s law and the law of universal gravitation are such early theories.
More generally “action at a distance” describes the failure of early atomistic and mechanistic theories which sought to reduce all physical interaction to collision.
The exploration and resolution of this problematic phenomenon led to significant developments in physics, from the concept of a field, to descriptions of quantum entanglement and the mediator particles of the Standard Model.[1]
Looking at it from an engineering-empirical point of view, it is indeed faster than light, because for communication or computing purposes there is no need to verify anything at light-speed.
If you could travel faster than light then headlights would be useless.......
In theoretical physics, quantum nonlocality most commonly refers to the phenomenon by which measurements made at a microscopic level contradict a collection of notions known as local realism that are regarded as intuitively true in classical mechanics.
However, some quantum mechanical predictions of multi-system measurement statistics on entangled quantum states cannot be simulated by any local hidden variable theory. An explicit example is demonstrated by Bell’s theorem, which has been verified by experiment.[1]
Experiments have generally favoured quantum mechanics as a description of nature, over local hidden variable theories.[2][3] Any physical theory that supersedes or replaces quantum theory must make similar experimental predictions and must therefore also be nonlocal in this sense; quantum nonlocality is a property of the universe that is independent of our description of nature.
Quantum nonlocality does not allow for faster-than-light communication,[4] and hence is compatible with special relativity. However, it prompts many of the foundational discussions concerning quantum theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality
___________________________
The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox or the EPR paradox[1] of 1935 is a thought experiment in quantum mechanics with which Albert Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen (EPR) claimed to demonstrate that the wave function does not provide a complete description of physical reality, and hence that the Copenhagen interpretation is unsatisfactory; resolutions of the paradox have important implications for the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
The work was based at The Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton University in 1934, which Einstein joined after he fled Nazi Europe.
Albert Einstein
The essence of the paradox is that particles can interact in such a way that it is possible to measure both their position and their momentum more accurately than Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle allows, unless measuring one particle instantaneously affects the other to prevent this accuracy, which would involve information being transmitted faster than light as forbidden by the theory of relativity (”spooky action at a distance”).
This consequence had not previously been noticed and seemed unreasonable at the time; the phenomenon involved is now known as quantum entanglement.
Per EPR, the paradox demonstrated that quantum theory was incomplete, and needed to be extended with hidden variables. One modern resolution is as follows: for two “entangled” particles created at once (e.g. an electron-positron pair from a photon), measurable properties have well-defined meaning only for the ensemble system.
Properties of constituent subsystems (e.g. the individual electron or positron), considered individually, remain undefined. Therefore, if analogous measurements are performed on the two entangled subsystems, there will always be a correlation between the outcomes, and a well-defined global outcome for the ensemble.
However, the outcomes for each subsystem, considered separately, at each repetition of the experiment, will not be well defined or predictable. This correlation does not imply that measurements performed on one particle influence measurements on the other. This modern resolution eliminates the need for hidden variables, action at a distance, or other schemes introduced over time, in order to explain the phenomenon.
According to quantum mechanics, under some conditions, a pair of quantum systems may be described by a single wave function, which encodes the probabilities of the outcomes of experiments that may be performed on the two systems, whether jointly or individually.
At the time the EPR article discussed below was written, it was known from experiments that the outcome of an experiment sometimes cannot be uniquely predicted. An example of such indeterminacy can be seen when a beam of light is incident on a half-silvered mirror. One half of the beam will reflect, and the other will pass.
If the intensity of the beam is reduced until only one photon is in transit at any time, whether that photon will reflect or transmit cannot be predicted quantum mechanically.
The routine explanation of this effect was, at that time, provided by Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Physical quantities come in pairs called conjugate quantities.
Examples of such conjugate pairs are (Position, momentum), (Time, energy), and (Angular position, angular momentum). When one quantity was measured, and became determined, the conjugated quantity became indeterminate. Heisenberg explained this uncertainty as due to the quantization of the disturbance from measurement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox
Coulombo's law demands that every chili dish requires a hot, spicy gravytation...
For some years I have wished that I had known about Quantum Physics at a young age. When I finally discovered it, I was already involved in Theology. I still lament my ability to know the math of it, but the theory of it is so fascinating. I love reading all the Quantum theories and feel some sense of understanding it. It is the closest we have come to proving that God is one thing, not many. Existence as we see it is all one thing. I can almost understand it. Too old now, but I would have been a happy “hunter” if I had been aware of a science that really could explain things.
“Particle” was just the most likely metaphor to use to describe what can’t be seen, and will never be seen, whatever the hell it is.
PS. Schrodinger’s imaginary “cat” is either alive or not alive. There is no middle ground between a statement and its negation.