Talk:ER = EPR

ER = EPR for the correspondence between parent and offspring universe within the cyclic cosmology

ER = EPR in intercyclic correspondence (inter- means "between"; cosmocyclic, cosmologically cyclic, about cyclic cosmology)

Very close to the ideas of Roger Penrose, but with a different phase transition.

The holographic principle holds true here.

Here it's not about black holes but universe states / states of the universe, specifically its about the Hubble volume field (related to eternalism), because Hubble volumes are infinite and overlapping. They overall create a bulk universe, which isn't accessible to single arbitrary central points/coordinate centers/impersonal or personhooded observers.

Comments

You'd need to be a physicist to understand this article. An encyclopedia is supposed to be read by laypeople. Richard75 (talk) 20:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

"An encyclopedia is supposed to be read by laypeople." No, some topics require extensive background knowledge. ZBalling (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Bent timespace doesn't cause gravity. Fast velocity does both, but, the velocity can't exceed the speed of light. Gravity bends timespace globally. It's analogue in electrical engineering, current, of course, also bends timespace globally, which, due to leaving the rigid orthogonality of flat time space, allows faster polarity cancellation rates, also known as entropy production rates in thermodynamics. Visa versa, a fast polarity cancellation rate, entropy production rate, also bends timespace globally. These facts have been "top secret" to keep the people more controllable. The Philadelphia Experiment used the current analogue to teleport to anywhere, and to anytime, by lowering the pi value of that timespace below 2, and thereby all quantumly entangled were transduced into probability. Such travel is called probability transduction travel. Anyone, with enough privacy, can build a polarity cancellation device, like, for example a photon collider, to promote fast polarity cancellation. By lining up parallel mirrors, mirrored on both sides, and flooding them with light, will facilitate photon collisions. For each pair of collided photons there are differentiated a particle and an antiparticle which swiftly cancel out back into photons. Enough of these polarity cancellations bends timespace globally. Bending timespace below 2, all quantumly entangled is transduced into probability, and thereby will teleport to the place and time to which the traveler is tuned. The Philadelphia Experiment was followed up by experiments at Montauk, NY, and finally moved to, and continued at the Naval base in Nevada. To further facilitate the cancellation of these particles and antiparticles, a magnet keeps them nearby. That magnet is called a "flux capacitor". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:19B:701:5710:941F:294:7FC:96E9 (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

What an amazing collection of nonsense! Good thing it's on a Talk page where not many people will be subjected to it. --Rpresser

Size matters

If we have two entangled black holes that don't have ABSOLUTELY the same properties (and never do!!!) for example mass, the entanglement will become encrypted, id est the information will be "rotated" according to the specific chart of that specific property.

OK 2a02:2149:8451:9600:65d6:7585:38e0:a15e, do you have a reference for those statements? If so it could be added to the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Failure of Mathematics

"In thinking about ER=EPR, there is a possibility that mathematics is inadequate for describing the physical universe, and things like holographic projections on surfaces (in higher dimensions) are actually mathematical patches rather than a representation of physical phenomenon. Instead, I think the solution might come from AI enabled to invent superior AI, ad infinitum, until the machine tells us it has solved something akin to ToE. Then there might be another problem if the machine starts using symbolism that supersedes mathematics and is unintelligible to us, such that the new symbolism cannot be reduced to understandable math. It would be a curious state to live in a world where computers understand ToE, but we don't. I would guess that such HyperAI could still use its findings to engage in engineering and design new devices. Probably, we could still understand what these devices do. Maybe, then, it would be possible to engineer a sentient machine." Charles Juvon (talk) 22:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Well when it happens, and you have a reference that we can understand, then we can consider whether text can be included. If others have already written that ER=EPR implies that mathematics is inadequate for describing the physical universe, then please let us know, as that would be worth including in the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:46, 1 January 2021 (UTC)