Posted by Robert on 8/15/2001, 11:22 am
      205.188.197.168

      Zak's comments in italics; mine in bold.

     The fact is that on different occasions throughout his life Einstein made a number of seemingly
      self-contradictory statements regarding his views and beliefs on psychic and mystical topics.

      This is just wrong. Einstein NEVER believed in anything of the paranormal. Notice that no citations
      were given.

      On several occasions, for example, he expressed a strong interest in research into ESP and other psychic
      phenomena. He even wrote the introduction to Upton Sinclair's Mental Radio.

      Einstein and Sinclair were friends, mostly because of their common political beliefs. Both were
      socialists. Sinclair wrote of his wife’s supposed ESP abilities. Einstein was loyal, if misguided when he
      wrote the brief introduction. From Einstein – a Life by Denis Brian, John Wiley & Son, Inc. 1996, p 216:
      “Einstein did it (attended a séance) because he liked Sinclair very much. …He (Einstein) said that he
      wrote the preface to Sinclair’s book on telepathy as a matter of friendship.”

     It is very important to remember, in any discussion concerning Einstein and his views on psychic
      phenomena, that Einstein was implacably opposed to Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum physics
      (which, if true, would contravene his own Theory of Relativity) and spent the latter half of his life trying to
      disprove quantum mechanics, which appeared to imply the existence of some kind of existential telepathy.

     Einstein and Bohr had many arguments about Bohr’s theory, all of which Bohr won. The parenthetic
      comment was just Einstein’s initial reaction. He soon realized that was not the case at all because no
      information was exchanged. Other than the "thought experiments" he threw at Bohr, Einstein spent the
      “latter half” of his life trying to combine gravity and the other forces. He spent NO time, to my
      knowledge, trying to “disprove” quantum mechanics. He did not agree with it, but it was not a topic he
      researched. He was interested in discovering the truth in nature, not in a mere attempt to discredit a
      theory he knew worked so well.

     Einstein, who helped to lay the foundations for QM (and who was awarded the Nobel prize for his
      contribution to this field), was never able to accept what he termed the “schizophrenic” nature of quantum
      particles, which he considered “too spooky” to be true.
      "It is as if photons are accompanied by ghost waves", he commented.
      He could never be convinced that twin particles, if separated, would continue to interact with each other as
      if they were still connected. He believed that this phenomenon could only be explained "...by assuming that
      measuring S1 (the first particle) telepathically changes the real situations of S2 (the other particle) or by
      denying independently real situations as such to things which are spatially separated from each other".

     This is just absurd. Einstein proposed the existence of “hidden variables” to account for the EPR
      paradox. The continual reference to “telepathy” is misleading. Einstein was not an idiot.

     The existence of telepathy, therefore (as in the truly instantaneous transference of information from one
      location to another), was inconsistent with with his own Relativity.

     Again, Einstein came to realize that NO information was exchanged and his opposition was based on his
      unswerving belief in determinism, as his oft quoted remark reveals. “I cannot believe that God plays
      dice with the world.”

     Whether QM implies a "transference of information" very much depends on one's definition of
      "information". It is certainly possible to transfer information via entangled particles.

     Bell’s Theorem made it clear that NO information was transferred. That Quantum Mechanics allows
      subluminal transfer of information is trivially true.

      In any event it was Einstein, not I, who used the term "telepathy" in relation to entanglement.

     Einstein’s use of the word “telepathy” was ironic and was used to criticize Bohr’s resolution of the EPR.
      He never used it in relation to “entanglement,” since that term came into use well after his time.

      Look, I don't mean to be rude, but you just don't know what you're talking about. You've already made an
      ass of yourself with your earlier statements, and now, instead of going away and doing a bit more research
      into the subject, you're compounding your folly by making even more nonsensical statements.
      Like many people, you think you understand quantum mechanics, but in fact - as is abundantly clear from
      the silly statements you've made above (and previously) - you do not.

     What would he be like if he WERE rude?

     While every individual, local measurement on a photon produces a random outcome, and can therefore
      carry no information from one location to another, it is nevertheless possible to transfer information by
      quantum entanglement. The method relies on the sender and the reciever sharing a pair of entangled
      particles, A and B. If the sender, who has a particle that is in an unknown quantum state (X), carries out a
      Bell-state measurement on particles A and X, this will produce one of four possible outcomes. If this result
      is transmitted to the receiver by non-quantum means, the receiver can choose to either leave his particle
      unaltered or rotate it. In either case it ends up a perfect replica of the original particle X.

     Could anyone make sense of this? Gibberish!

     My "telepathy" quote is from:Albert Einstein, Autobiographical Notes, Harper and Row

     And the citation given here is disingenuous. The ONLY autobiography Einstein wrote was for the
      volume “Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist,” in the series called
      The Library of Living Philosophers, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp. If the author of these fantasies had
      actually read that book, then he would have given the full citation, as required.

     The speed of light never entered into the discussion until "Robert" introduced it in an attempt to fudge the
      issue and squirm out of the corner he'd painted himself into. What I said was that information can be
      transferred via quantum entanglement. I never mentioned the speed of light or superluminal particles.

     Sorry, but I rarely squirm, and it takes a Bernie, Shanks or Askew to do that – not some squirrelly
      cowboy who mixes argument with ad hominems. As for the speed of light, what was all that crap about
      “telepathy” about? And what prompted this nonsense in the first place?

     Quantum information can be transmitted by the method I outlined. With regard to the speed of light, there
      is nothing either in quantum physics or in Newtonian physics to prevent zero-mass particles from travelling
      in excess of the speed of light.

     Ah, yes, “teleportation.” Admittedly an interesting experiment, although I suspect, useless in the end,
      IMO. And as I said before, Einstein postulated that the speed of light was the ultimate speed in the
      universe. He has been proven correct in thousands of experiments. And since the photon is the ONLY
      zero-mass particle we now are aware of (the projected graviton presumably would be), your comment is
      ditzy.

      Enough. I thought it worthwhile to expose this imposter, but I probably overdid it. If so, I apologize for wasting
      your time.

      RN