Locality and Superluminal

Generally, we might define the scope of ‘locality’ in terms of the speed of light [c] and time [t], where the product represents a boundary beyond which a local particle cannot be affected – see Light Cones for more details. However, the basic idea of quantum entanglement seems to suggest that some form of superluminal signalling must occur between entangled particles. While this issue is beyond the scope of this review, the reader might consider whether the following two paraphrased statements, taken from Wikipedia, really provides any causal explanation. First, the issue of superluminal communication.

Superluminal communication is a hypothetical process in which information is sent at faster-than-light (FTL>ct) speeds. The current scientific consensus is that faster-than-light communication is not possible, and to date it has not been achieved in any experiment. Under present knowledge superluminal communication is impossible because it could be used to transmit information into the past that leads to logical paradoxes.

So, at first glance, this statement would appear to rule out the possibility of any form of superluminal communication on the basis of any known physics. However, the article then goes on to qualify this position in terms of something called quantum non-locality, although the reader may also want to question whether the description below is anchored to any physical causal mechanism.

Quantum mechanics is non-local in the sense that distant systems can be entangled. Entangled states lead to correlations in end-states, even when the measurements are made nearly simultaneously and separated by distances in excess of [ct]. However, while it is assumed that quantum entanglement does not allow any information to propagate superluminally, quantum field theory defines a special case described in terms of the no-communication theorem.

At this point, no attempt will be made to follow Alice down the rabbit-hole towards yet more quantum weirdness. While many may disagree, much of modern quantum theory now appears to rest on its own form of ‘conjecture’ based on a mathematical abstraction that often appears to have no causal foundations and subject to multiple interpretations. In this respect, most of the ideas in website-3 share a similar ‘desire’ with the primary goal of the Cordus conjecture to anchor its descriptions to some form of physical causation, even though much of this review has questioned many aspects of the Cordus model. However, we shall attempt to pursue the description of non-locality, as explained by the Cordus model, by citing the following statement.

The behaviour of an object is only affected by its immediate surroundings, not by distant objects or events elsewhere, such that it leads to a local realism, where the properties of an object pre-exist before the object is observed. However, Bell’s theorem sets these against each other by implying that only one perspective can be correct: either superluminal effects or that local realism cannot exist.

Of course, while much of quantum theory may be based on mathematical abstractions, it is also predicated on many empirical experiments, although there is considerable ambiguity about the physical processes occurring between the initial and final quantum states. However, despite the caveats highlighted, the general consensus supports the idea of non-locality and appears to accept Bell's theorem and its conclusion that no viable hidden-variable solution can exist.

So, how does the Cordus model address the issue of quantum entanglement?

In part, the answer to this question has already been generalised in the previous outline of the Cordus model, which accepts some form of superluminal effects, along with hidden variables, such that it revises the scope of locality. As indicated, the Cordus model allows superluminal effects, i.e. instantaneous communication, through the ‘fibril’ that connects the ‘reactive ends’ of the particule, presumably in the form of a photon or electron.  However, this description rejects the conclusion of Bell’s theorem on the grounds that quantum theory assumes a particle to be a 1D point with no substructure.

But how is the issue of superluminal communication addressed?

In essence, this issue remains unresolved in the Cordus model, which is one of the many concerns raised in this review. For many of the Cordus statements about physical realism rest on conjecture. As such, there are no obvious physical descriptions of the actual mass or energy constructs of the ‘reactive ends’ or how they are physically connected by the fibril or the process of frequency propagation of flux lines that form the fabric density. While this may be acceptable within the confines of a conjecture, the suggestion that the Cordus model provides a better description of physical realism seems premature. However, while the Cordus model does offer up some initial response to such criticisms, it appears to do so by simply expanding the scope of speculative conjecture. Therefore, this outline review will return to the description of an ‘energising frequency’ associated with the reactive ends of the particule model, which also appears to be surrounded by a descriptive ambiguity. For it is stated that the ‘span’ between the ‘reactive ends’ shortens as the frequency increases, which in-turn increases the emission rate of the discrete force that leads to an increase in mass, but does not necessarily explain how.

Note: It is assumed that the ‘span’ between the reactive ends refers to some unspecified spatial length occupied by the fibril. However, why this span/distance shortens with increased frequency is unclear. Equally, it is unclear as to what causes the reactive ends oscillate at some given frequency rate, other than the possibility that this frequency is driven by the incoming frequency of the ‘discrete forces’ being output by other particles. Of course, this idea may only lead to a chicken-and-egg question, i.e. what is the fundamental source of energy in the fabric density and what mechanism describes its propagation through the fabric density.

In this context, the Cordus model simply appears to state that when a reactive end is energised, it emits discrete forces in possibly three orthogonal directions. However, due to the alternating nature of this energy, the force emitted from the particule takes the form of a pulse. As such, it might be assumed that any particule might be receiving the output force pulses from other particules in the universe or, at least, those in the locality defined by [ct]. However, the Cordus model seems to suggest that the aggregation of these discrete force pulses creates an electro-magneto-gravitational field, which is also discrete in nature and forms a 3D composite field structure, i.e. the fabric density. The Cordus model further speculates that the discrete force pulse forms the basis of electrostatic interaction, while the bending of the force flux lines defines magnetism and torsion of these flux lines defines gravitation. Finally, the model speculates that synchronicity between discrete force elements of neighbouring particules is the basis of the strong force.

Note: Based on the outline description above, it appears that all of these fundamental force/fields are being linked to the aggregation of discrete forces being emitted from the particule model and propagate outwards into the space that separates all other types of particules. However, exactly how all these mechanisms work is also unclear at this stage.

Therefore, the reader is left to review the details of the Cordus model for themselves as listed in the section entitled Cordus References. However, this review will now pursue two other Cordus papers entitled in the sections entitled ‘Relativistic Factors’ and ‘ Emergent Time’.