What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?
EDIT: Let's cool it with the downvotes, dudes. We're not out to cut funding to your black hole detection chamber or revoke the degrees of chiropractors just because a couple of us don't believe in it, okay? Chill out, participate with the prompt and continue with having a nice day. I'm sure almost everybody has something to add.
You're viewing a single thread.
Quantum entanglement. Having two particles latched in the same state even if separated by light years distance is something I currently cannot believe. Maybe too dumb, but my belief is that it 'has' to be some experiment error.
An incomplete but better than most pop science explanations is as follows: Suppose I have 2 envelopes and 2 letters. We have a stamp that has A and B on it next to each other. Without looking we put the letters next to each other, randomly Orient the stamp and apply it. Then we fold the letters up and put them in the envelops. Now we look at the stamp as see it has A and B on it.
We know that one letter contains A and the other B but not which, you take one and fly to Siberia while I enjoy a nice holiday in Tasmania (sorry but this is the sacrifice of science). I open my letter and see a B, instantly I know that in Siberia there is a letter containing A.
Light speed etc isn't violated here because we travelled below light speed when setting it all up, I haven't affected your letter just gained some insight about the overall system by inspecting one part of it.
Now there are a lot of things I've glossed over but it's much closer to opening letters than psychic woo particles.
edit: as to keeping them latched it's hard. The coupling is like conservative laws (e.g. spin up and spin down so no net overall spin) but any interactions destroy the coupling (or rather extend it to whatever just might've swapped spin with a particle). AFAIK nobody has maintained a system over lightyears for that reason among many, but like shipping pineapples to England the barrier appears practical rather than theoretical.