Using entanglement to communicate faster than light

Every one says not possible.

Intuition on why entanglement may permit communication faster than light

 Intuition on why entanglement may not permit communication faster than light.

THE FOLLOWING INTERPRETATION OF THE NO GO THEOREM INDICATES THE ESSENTIAL REASON OF THE NO GO IMPOSSIBILITY -

A particle in entanglement shows correlated properties at the places where its entangled partners are, but any deliberate change in the state of particle causes it to lose entanglement! Any experimental determination of the state of particle destroys subsequent entanglement.

How else can one reuse entanglement ?

To keep things simple
1. Same is used to indicate removal of perfect correlation between entangled pairs
2. Setting up by some number of all 1's etc
3. New bits can be dynamically entangled. Initially some entangled bits transported slower than light.

Let us assume that it is somehow possible to detect if a particle is encrypted or not. One can make many copies of entangled particle, sacrificing one copy per bit whenever experimented, hence does photon had the right value. So a pair+ is sacrificed per bit - one to get the value and one+ repeatedly killed to state the correctness or not of the data bit!

Detection of entangled-or-not is done comparing a pair of  remote entangled photons, either same or not. This sacrifice can be done faster than light The killed pair result may be wrong, then correctness sent by another pair and so on. This sequence terminates as bad cases are halved every time! In the rare case of no verification in some m steps, all attempts fail and next bit of bitstream is used, as if repeat of this bit was made. So the encryption-sacrifice returns yes or maybe (chance <= 1/2^m).

Above is not practical as many steps require very fast computation and sequentiality.

How to make it practical

This algorithm is likely slow wrt light. But one can make very large number of copies to send in parallel!

Intuition on why wavelet quantum mechanics is better in many places

Usual QM is Fourier analysis in all places. Signal processing indicates there will be subtle differences. QM is correct about the frequency, but not the time of the wave when signal is changing where that frequency occurs! Following is instructive –

Both have similar time-free spectrum, thus being quantum undistinguishable. This does not happen with Morlet wavelet!

Universe evolution

Latest link

WHY DO I CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING MY GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT SINCE NEAR DEATH 30 YEARS AGO? It is the final nail in the coffin of God, even God-of-the gaps! It shuts up the skeptic who asks, "but who lit the match at big bang"

The Cyclic Model of Turok was developed based on the three intuitive notions:
 • the big bang is not a beginning of time, but rather a transition to an earlier phase of evolution;
• the evolution of the universe is cyclic;
• the key events that shaped the large scale structure of the universe occurred during a phase of slow contraction before the bang, rather than a period of rapid expansion (inflation) after the bang.

This extends, believing that this edition will live on forever.

Like the master Darvin arguing for Life based on natural selection based evolution! More than all, only universe-evolution (falsifiable like molecular evolution). My belief is contraction/expansion at big bang the only way to evolve the universe - very slow but time may be infinite! Genius of Darwin was in enunciation of natural selection fundamental to evolution! Contraction/expansion allow natural selection of universes

There are two cosmogonic sets (explained) this article opposes, even while accepting scientific  cosmology - any-religion and all extant cosmogonies (science narratives of how universe came to be). Easy is dismissal of all religion-based cosmogonies on the principal of ignorance - pointless to argue with subanimals. Only allowed are those consistent with astronomy extended to cosmogonies.

Superiority to all extant cosmogonies follows from the very simple lack (must explain) of any physics principle without infinite regress! Where do ANY rules of our cosmos come from? Is that process consistent to every rule of cosmology, even those not yet understood! Every religion falls flat on their description of the universe - they are simply analysis of limited observations by excellent brains of the period - with no useful path-finding for scientists of the future! I set a possible disproof and am a path-finder!

Science is falsifiable , says great philosopher Popper. Next I define truths provably inaccessible to science. If true, these MUST extend science! They are true but provably impossible to test ! In my words, falsifiability is extended by sentences true in limits even not reachable.

COSMOGENIES EXISTING

uniting the very small and very large indirect proof of big bang

impossible physics 

NONE OF THE COSMOGENIES HAVE ANY IDEA OF genesis and applicability of the science principles! Mine is different in that rules is the starting point! It assumes infinite numbers of universes in the multiverse, each with origins infinitely earlier. Each universe has infinite number of expansions and contractions, each pair resulting in a subtly different universe in the idea of universe evolution! Each universe may or maynot have intelligent life in it. Our universe has a current epoch with a set of rules conducive to the production of intelligent life - us. It has all the science rules from the evolution - their must be a series of rules that show current rules as either dependent on other basicer rules.

There is a justification of adoption of history of rules. Each derivation is falsifiable from the previous. Not only my thinking provide a basis of work, it provides a path to new theories. Evolution of life on earth provides a wonderful collage of theories with multiple epoch - first Darwinian and in-progress extension to molecular evolution expressed as phylogenetics trees. This happens as DNA of any biology is codewords on 4 letters! One can measure distances in many ways, specially by incorporating molecular substitution costs.

This is a basically better (than darwinian) because a missing link need not exist between between near molecules that can be shown near by creating intermediates in a lab and then argue of the climates and earth state of any missing link animals.

Universe evolution is caused not by any God, but the amount of dark energy created between cycles.What happens at contraction? The information of the contracting part is lost through quantum particles and the universe contracts to a minimal size of the maximally dense material possible in space! After that, universe explodes again. New edition has different dark energy and primarily different in space related constants and time constants. All others have geometric relation to free constants that are reset. This is a falsifiable claim! In particular, it appears that Planck length, speed of light, Higgs constant and vacuum energy (dark) are reset.

Critical falsifiability says that all but space principles evolve as does Planck length and velocity of light. Note that smallest time is light in free space travelling Planck length.

Even Heisenberg uncertainty principle is simple uncertainty in all Fourier analysis in product of complementary variables! Complementary to position is velocity in position and time signal systems!
Trigonometric functions are BETTER done as Morlet wavelets in newer better Quantum theory being written! Superiority over usual QM is that Gabor analysis works even with spatial and time domains unlike Schrodinger equation only spatial (not even relativistic).

Why dark energy?

It is the energy of space. It does not dilute with expanding space! It is simply set at creation cycle event!

Why assume fluctuation?

Whether a universe expand forever or contracts, depends on dark energy! A universe lives on till it reaches a perpetually expanding edition.

Source of science rules?

Universal evolution. All needed for current epoch of universe is one series leading to us, or alternately limiting to no rules at all.

Each universe cycle must be very specific?

Not really! Whether a UE series makes sense or not depends on every term being different in dark energy, for all that happens in each cycle is calibration of the space.

What drives thinking so?

Error-correcting codes for quantum computers are already in quantum space! Quantum space is just space with quantum rules. Matter is just Higgs Boson-trapped photons! Real  vacuum is just space alive with quantum particles with fleeting matter and antagonists. This is due to creation of space at big bang point in every cycle. It need not be same in every universe iteration.

What is this cosmogony based on?

A discrete space-time leads to string theory or loop quantum gravity LQG.

A big bounce scenario is natural in LQG.

Bounce is the only Universe evolution method for science rules! It is the

No graviton or basic dark matter has been found. Verlinde imagines correctly  no such thing as dark-matter. His string theory thinking modifies galactic rotation curves correctly and Einstein bending of light around galaxies! I (minority) think Verlinde is right.

Gravity is not a quantum force, hence no graviton (never found)! It is not a product of big bang. Neither time or space is fundamental  (hence follows space-time as per Einstein) and follow from entropic gravity.

There is no dark energy either, it is vacuum quantum energy. Galaxies far away accelate away faster due to  QVE.

Why make the massive claim of new better cosmogony?

Only existing that explains science rules by universal evolution, eliminates dark energy and dark matter through Dr. Verlinde and explains quantum vacuum with natural quantum error-correction codes .

Last ref indicates why now is the earliest above could be written!

What is the falsifiability here?

Only universe evolutions which are different in space terms are correct. All other constants must be expressible in terms of geometry and varying space constants. Higgs value and vacuum strength are likely from space evolution. Any amount of universal fine tuning is likely.

Where are they?

It is sheer vanity to consider humans as only intelligent species. It is also unbreakable physics that makes a no go theorem of light speed. Wherever they are, they stay far away. NO travel faster than light speed is possible -  all mass things require infinite mass at light speed. Any normal information transfer is impossible by a no go theorem - intuition is simple even though entanglement is faster than light, two entangled objects share a state, but ANY unnatural effort at changing the state of one kills the entanglement!

Particles

It ia natural for us to consider everything space-like since it evolves. Thus idea of particles as creation time back holes is natural. Studied in some depth here. Only some are stable, others are created in very energetic collisions ans rapidly evaporate into photons. Black holes are distinct based on when created, stellar or creation time.

Using encryption to communicate faster than light

Impractical but doable.

Evidence-based Supplementation for Aging

latest link

What is the best supplement for anti-aging? What supplements are scientifically proven? What vitamins help with aging? What is the recommendation for daily multivitamin supplementation in older adults? If you are impressed by non-EBS here,

Get lost, following is definite waste of time.

Aging is a universal disease from accretion of DNA damage in cells. That is my dogma adopted after several dozens of years of study, experience and nmn supplementation of three months. Aging is independent of quality of thoughts and belief – properly administered NMN and B3 vitamin forms work equally well for saints and criminals, believers, disbelievers and agnostics. FDA does not classify it so at this time and that opens up many avenues.

MY EBS complex, properly used will do something desired for 50,000 years, ever since human advanced to writing – a way to defeat death. I can aver after trial on self – it is not simple NMN, details are important. Like physicians, details are crucial. The components are known – NMN, TMG, CoQ10, omega-3 etc. Proper benefit is through proper use! Example is NAD by blood infusion, NMN sublingually. Goal is to overcome common afflictions of old age besides getting the energy through NMN, which itself is complicated by need for TMG or Betaine! That means Dec 2018 literature! Searching in MD literature is a waste of time – few believe in it and even fewer gel the experiences of bio-hacker as me!

Mice testing makes a golden hypothesis much better than anyphilosophy or education. However, a hypothesis may fail, or apply differently. Mice are fed NMN about 500 mg per kilo and through water drink. Immediately NR-NMN controversy starts as does sublingual versus capsules. Immense doses of B3-like are used, they require methylation for emission as piss. If you do nothing, they damage homocystein that creates inflammation like heart disease!  Why not use NAD+ or NaDH directly (cross into brin but bas cell entry! Tricky details.

Betaine or TMG or B-15 vitamin has three methyl groups and performs methylation. Even better is choline but that is bad for a diabetic as me! Also dmg exists but has low strength to TMG. TMG is used, along with other chemicals to lower homocystein which is a measure of inflammation of heart patients. Unlike cholesterol, with no evidence support in heart events, inflammation is evidence based Factor! The key lowering agent TMG is also available as supplement!

This brings me to analysis of self as Evidence-Based Supplementation expert or EBS expert. First my thinking is scholarly – no facts except evidence or derivation. Result is hypothesis for which evidence is mandatory. Because I deal with supplements only, my work is complementary to doctors. In all matters when timing is an issue. Regular Allopathy is supported, not Ayurveda, Unnani or Chinese. My claim is serious doubts in sanctity of medical education at large with significant differences on long-term management because of serious doubts on facts by continuation of claims of elders and supposedly truth saying ancients! These are always hypothesis generators for evidence based truth! Regular doctor has no business giving opinions on diabetes, heart events and cancers. FDA testing of medicine is flawed because they do not explain how much better. Especially important to cancer patients where 10 % BETTER is convincing to a patient but may not mean much for management of estate, price of drugs and possible minuscule improvement in survival chances (0.1 % to 0.11 percent)!

Harm is central! No point in any routine that requires medicine like absoluteness! Most supplements have no schedule or sharp dosage. Except that sublingual has a required gap. NMN needs to be mixed, with at least TMG, if not more. Such a mix of 4 as been patented by EGA as EGAceutable! What about another, based on NMN and TMG but not the others! No troll is likely to bother you! That is safety one. What about with TMG but different from you? Aging is a huge market – every human gets old. It will be easy to get competition into any XYZ with regard to life extended.

How can you tell? People have public age. Also a biological age. Chronological age is the number of years a person has been alive, while biological age refers to how old a person seems. Biological age, also referred to as physiological age, takes many lifestyle factors into consideration, including diet, exercise and sleeping habits, to name a few. Value in bioage cannot be manipulated! It is directly related to expected life!

So application of TMG, and dosage of form of B3 constitutes virgin territory which I will occupy and my usefulness can be measured. I also escape from medical establishment. Open challenge – if you be better then show it in open test! Bioage is standardized.

TMG is Dec 2018! I start on it middle of next Jan. I will get bugs out by self test! TMG can’t hurt as is very docile molecule, in any case good for my heart! More complexity I encounter, better is it for EBS. Already B3, niacin, nicotinamide, NR, NMN, NAD+ and NaDH choices with administration by food, sublingual or intravenously, Doages and mixes! You must have deep biology interest and reading to crack EBS. And also real belief in work to try it on self!

GENE EDITING

latest link

My interest goes back to 1976 when I studied and liked L-systems (Lindenmeyer). Botanists were trying out L-systems to understand the construction of tangle of flowers. This requires propagation rules in context sensitive grammars. Context-free were the rage then, but insufficient to control, specific changes in several sites. This time dependent behavior required rewrite rules with context! Specific required context could be propagated to desired places only.

I became a compiler writer with expertise in yacc which dealt only with LR(1) subsystems of context-free languages only. I developed great attachment to attributes, rewrote yacc to allow attributes and come up with two level context-free (LR-1 really) and two-level LR-1 really is most powerful possible(two-level CFG = type 0)! Attributes are really for context-sensitive ness! When done, attributed LL-1 grammars will rule the world, even better than Go. Go is great for it encapsulates, Ken Thompson ideas on parallelism and has parallel garbage collection!  My language, improving Go is eventual, though more like Haskell.

But here we only apply to crispr for genetic editing. One can capture scientist work to create an appropraite model of production of an organism from the root cell. Despite ethical storm from germline edits, I limit to crops! There is a worry that in using CRISPR-Cas9 to repair one disease-causing mutation in human embryos, other potentially harmful mutations may be unintentionally introduced. To understand this consider context sensitive rewrite.

A  T  G C

G T C A existing DNA

T C A G

In this suppose out goal is replace middle sequence with AGTC  TAGC. OUR conext-sensitive rewrite is

A  T  G C         A  T  G C

G T C A  =>     A G T C

T C A G         T A G C

                    T C A G

Clever bio-chemistry later (context and replacement becomes an RNA that mixes with DNA, mix replaces this context sequence atgc tcag in all places. ATGC TCAG are matched and cut happens in middle there.

DNA forms a double helix. Ca9 may cut both, different RNA only 1, then two different RNA are needed. Both can have different contexts. One can improve cutting so. The chance of wrong cut is smaller! Together with more context, accuracy may be increased.

Crispr-cas9 is best now, but competes with transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and (ZFNs).

Recently a Chinese scientist He applied to human germ-line, produced babies, and was roundly criticized! Easy bad science giving bad-name to non-germline research! Why? Only way to trace errors is repeated genetic testing of humans so produced! What if error found, what do you do! What if error in germline DNA? Horrible questions, no answers. Non-germline errors in one in individual only!

NMN epistemology and appplications

SELF LINK

In this context means "who to believe". I have followed Dr. Sinclair into FDA yet-untested NMN (3 tests, 2 in USA, one in japan due 2020 or more) uniquely qualified to achieve this and persuade because he has successfully tried on mice, has fed himself and parents for 12 years, looks 20 year younger, can convince me he does not need money directly or as a front (is billionaire from invention of reservertrol, ALL age-sellers = used car salesmen!), chosen by NASA for health of Mars astronauts, tenured faculty in Harvard medicine. Only lack of manipulation angle means him and not elesium/chromadex NR. All sellers are safely considered greedy with onus of sincerity proof on them!

Given any human of even moderate intelligence, amortality (different from immortality, healthy long life span) is a natural wish, every subhuman knows it, knows how to get it, or knows teacher who can. Any scientific thinker (not a subhuman believer) must be able to derive and only derive every aspect of whatsoever considered science (All required). This constrains epistemology - every derivation is a hypothesis, derived by hunans who could be wrong. The hypothesis must rationally derive the results. Thus ONLY expect able scientists are rational skeptics. Given the paucity of developments from the first principles, a scientist must provisionally accept certain facts, has an epistemological theory of who to believe when, and forms a rational stoic. Provisional acceptance of "blood sugars by Reddy organisation" is done by me to avoid the costs of the Max hospital, but not many others. This is rational stoic decision even absent my test. It may be different for others, in some cases just as good as mine, often less rational, but always other person choice. I retain the right to argue - an agree to disagree never implies error, only pointlessness of further argumentation!

It is particularly true for NMN. Rather than NMN, let us talk of X and my belief in it. I assume that some one else praises a Y. Why is my X superior to Y!?

Unless Y is accepted in a scientific way as rational skeptic, Y is bad! At once! All religious or most atheist products fail as no scientist have bothered yet. There are still conflicts betteen elisium products, possible claims like mitoq etc. So no blanket rejection helps there! It is no different than rational sketicism applied to products, Why is one better?
Anecdotal proof against aging exisr! Not enough by itself! Cap[italist monsters from america can buy endorsements!

The endorsement must be from applicable master scientists. Reduces field to NMN, NR, elisium, mitoq etc. All these are endorsed by master-scientists.

Things like mitoq etc do not claim general fight against aging, only effectiveness against specific patholgy.

So fight remains between NR combinations, NMN, NAD+ and NADH. All are steps in conversion of niacin (natural vitamin B3 to NAD+  which all cells can use in energy Krebs cycle and thus alleviate aging symptoms. NAD+ amount continuously declines with age.

You benefit from all. However bio availability in various cells varies a lot. NAD+ directly does not enter cells. Neither does NMN! NMN has another problem - it does not easily cross blood-brain interface by itself. Niacin causes unpleasant flushing! The effects vary with form. NR and NMN cost a lot, as does NAD+ and NADH but B3 - flushing niacin or  non-flushing nicotinamide form) is very cheap but glacial slow.

One way to consider situation if bio-availability depends of distance from NAD+ (which is needed). NAD+ is 0, NADH is 1/2 away. nmn is 1 away. NR is 2 away.Niacin is 3 away. No one but NR enters a cell - NMN< NAD+ and NADH must become NR to enter and must revert back to what they were. Depends on cell i.e. afflction to decide which one!

Neat solution for normal humans is some NMN and some NAD+. Latter to help Alzheimer's, essential tremors and Parkinson; all affliction of brain. How to take them? Sublingual, NAD+ at morn and post dimmer presleep, while 5 does of NMN per day. do it 4-5 days per week.

All tests are on mice now. 3 big human studies have started, safe MD data by 2020 or 2021. Freezes looks at start - bad idea to wait unless proof - there is no -ve effect (NMN,NAD+) very inactive. Just prevent liver step by sublingual!