Instantaneous Quantum Entanglement, Vacuum Processes, and Calculation of Cosmological Constant

Instantaneous Quantum Entanglement, Vacuum Processes, and Calculation of Cosmological Constant

Richard Bradford

Jul 17, 2017

I want to thank Gordon Rogers for enlightening conversations


“Spooky action at a distance” as said by A. Einstein. Bell type experiments have eliminated various loopholes for deterministic hidden variable influence and established that quantum entanglement of light and particles is nonlocal. Experiments have shown that increasing separation distance between detectors and using faster and greater precision processing electronics, the lower limit of the speed of entanglement, all outside the light-cone, increases. There is an implication that the quantum influence is instantaneous. It is proposed that instantaneous nonlocal processes are supported by forward time positive and backward time negative energy connected electromagnetic and if applicable transient dipole ground states determined by the fine structure constant. The energy-time relation is determined by a quantized harmonic oscillator ground state solution of Maxwell’s equation. The positive and negative ground states evolve according to forward and backward time and spatial quantum clocks based on concepts of distinguishability and indistinguishability developed in the Hilgevoord-Uffink uncertainty relations. Positive plus negative energy ground states support opposite time currents corresponding to relativistic invariant equations having positive and negative frequency components. The description of transient dipoles using the Stüeckleberg-Feynman interpretation determines the correct total displacement, time of existence of the dipole, and density of transient dipoles in the vacuum. Non-elastic and elastic electron-positron or electron-electron scattering is proposed using ground state processes. The issue of the large vacuum energy is addressed and the cosmological constant is calculated from frequency of occurrence of transient dipoles based upon the fine structure constant.


Let there be two identical measuring devices, A and B, equidistant from a source emitting correlated light quanta or particles in some rest frame, which measure the polarization attribute of light quanta or spin orientation of particles, simultaneously. At A or B, it is found that measurements have random results but, when compared, the results are correlated with one another, violating Bell’s inequality and agreeing with the predictions of Quantum Mechanics. Experiments discussed below performed with light quanta have closed in separate experiments nearly all deterministic hidden variable loopholes with the conclusion the quantum influence between A and B is in fact nonlocal.

The freedom of choice loophole has been closed. Nondeterministic polarizer settings are determined by random quantum generators at A and B each outside the light cone of the emission point so not to be influenced by the source. Any hidden variable theory, then, can only specify a probability distribution and deterministic outcome theory would then pose no fundamental problem since the dependence is on stochastic settings.

The locality loophole has been closed. The results of measurements of the photon polarization at A and B are correlated when done outside of each other’s light cone establishing the nonlocal nature of the entanglement i.e. no influence of the measurement outcomes between A and B occurs at or less than the speed of light. Precise clocks, previously synchronized, running at A and B record the time, random polarizer settings, and outcomes. The results are later compared and found to violate Bell’s inequality. Closing the freedom of choice and locality loopholes have been done in one experiment.

The fair assumption loophole, which is photons detected are an accurate account of the emitted photons, has been closed by counting and taking into account the lost photons with newly available highly efficient and highly sensitive detectors.

A single experiment closing all these loopholes have yet to be done. Following Bell, “there is no reason to think that if the loopholes are closed in separate experiments, there is a conspiracy that the local hidden variable theories would suddenly be valid if all closing of loopholes can be done in one experiment”.

It should be mentioned that super deterministic or hidden variables influencing the experiment from the past light cone has not been ruled out as of yet. This may be achieved by using two quasars separated by a large angle in the sky so not to have interacted with each other yet. The detectors would be configured by the quasars and provide for independence of quantum measurement. If hidden variable interactions exist, then the detectors configured via the quasars would produce different results than detectors configured by ordinary random process. This experiment has not yet been performed.

Also, experiments involving increasing the distances between A and B have been performed that set larger lower bounds on the speed of the quantum influence, which are all greater than the speed of light. One such experiment established a lower bound with the detectors at a distance of 18 km apart on the earth’s surface where measurements are nearly, as set by technological standards, simultaneous with respect to a stationary observer on earth. Their result was that the lower bound was equal to 10,000 and the upper bound was 200,000 times the speed of light depending on the angle between detectors A and B relative to East-West given that the earth has a velocity, or β = 10-3, with respect to a universal reference frame fixed to the cosmic background radiation. Other experiments having distances of separation of 144km to 300km have set lower bounds even greater.

The descriptions of the entanglement connection between the detectors are four-fold:

  1. The entanglement connection can be explained with a time-like or null-like velocity.

  2. The entanglement connection is a finite superluminal velocity.

  3. The entanglement connection is diminished over distance.

  4. The entanglement connection is an instantaneous connection.

Closing the locality loophole rules out the entanglement connections described by condition 1. The entanglement connection described by condition 2 within terrestrial experiments give no indication of a finite speed, but due to present day technological limitations, instantaneity is not ruled out. Experimental increases of the lower bound of the connection speed leads to the possibility that a maximum speed may not exist and the connection is instantaneous. The technological limits for measurement of space-time resolution is quantum uncertainty, which has a spatial order of atomic dimensions in the detectors and a time based upon the speed of light crossing that distance. Then, as the speed increases, the maximum distance increases. Any distance beyond the maximum distance for a given speed leads to measurement reduction from either detector, which if equidistant from the source in a rest frame as a special case, to not reach the other during its measurement reduction resulting in a loss in correlated results.

In condition 3, the entanglement connection diminishes with distance by an absorbing field until no correlation occurs. The entanglement connection field carries no energy but may be diminished by expansion of the universe if the attenuation is consistent with redshift of electromagnetic waves. Both effects may be present together but both or either one have not been detected within terrestrial distances of separation. An entanglement connection not diminishing with distance has not been ruled out.

To summarize. The entanglement connection requires the existence of a field since it cannot be supported by nothing. The connection supported by a field either has a finite speed or is instantaneous and the characteristics of the field are that it has absorption qualities and/or is affected by the expansion of the universe or is non-attenuating. Other than simply naming these qualities, having physics of the field supporting and explaining these qualities provides for predictions and experimental verification, which would increase its viability and depth of strength.

There exists a field having these physical properties. If entanglement is supported by the existing vacuum, which is physical with specific describable properties, then there is no reason to assume existence of a field, which suffers from a lack of describable field structure to explain the above mentioned qualities. The vacuum has components that support and establish the qualities of the entanglement connection. Propagation of electromagnetic radiation shows that the vacuum has existed in space-time for billions of light years in an expanding universe since the big bang. The ground state parameters in the vacuum supporting the entanglement connection do not change due to redshift from an expanding universe since if the frequency of the ground state modes are changed by redshift, then the maximum ground state Planck frequency, corresponding to space-time itself, is redshifted. This implies that the fundamental constants, G, ħ, c, composing the Planck frequency, are changing over long times and distances in which there is no strong evidence of this occurring. Thus, the entanglement connection is not affected by expansion is explained. The vacuum, then, exists at all locations in an expanding universe and beyond the observable horizon since the vacuum or real objects cannot be interfaced with a region of non-vacuum or nothingness. The Casimir, Lamb effect, and polarization illustrate that the vacuum is a dynamic entity.

The following two postulates are then introduced.

  1. The entanglement connection between correlated objects is undiminished and instantaneous.

  2. Dynamic vacuum ground states is the field that supports the entanglement connection.

1) Structure, processes, and dynamics of electromagnetic and dipole ground states in the vacuum.

A) Positive and negative energy and time in equations, propagator, dynamic vacuum and distributions.

A scattering event such as an electron and positron is described with two probability amplitudes where M1 ≈ ∫d4x1d4x2[exp-ip1.x1][exp-ip2.x2](ig)[d4q/(2π)4][iexp(iq.(x1 – x2)gμν/q2](ig)exp(ip3.x1)exp(ip4.x2)(spinors are not present) and amplitude M2 is similar. The coupling g2 = α is the fine structure constant. The photon Feynman propagator is DF(x1 – x2) = ∫d4q/(2π)4iexp(iq.(x1 – x2)gμν)/[q2 + iε] and contains aspects of elastic and inelastic scattering. The four-momentum vector of the virtual photon is q and 1/q2 is the amplitude for a virtual particle existing. The relation q2 = 0 describes an on-shell photon. These aspects are shown by the Fourier decomposition of the photon propagator given as DF(x) = (1/(2π)4)∫[PP/q2 – iπδ(q2)]exp(ikx) = D + DI. D contains the real principle term, PP/q2, and is a time symmetric bound field, which describes an off shell virtual photon +-q2 ≠ 0 exchange of momenta in energy-momentum conserving elastic interactions, where -q2 is space-like elastic scattering. +q2 is time-like, e-e+ annihilation and creation with amplitude α. The imaginary part DI, where δ(q2) implies q2 = 0, describes the inelastic interaction with emission of an electromagnetic wave packet with an amplitude α. The Feynman prescription of integrating the propagator is integrating along the real axis from negative to positive q0 and counterclockwise (clockwise) in the positive (negative) complex plane at infinity circling the pole q0 = -lql + i0 (q0 = +lql – i0) giving t’ > t (t’ < t). The Feynman virtual photon propagator is the sum: iDFμν(x-y) = <0ΙT(Aμ(x)Aν(y)Ι0> = <0ΙAμ(x)Aν(y)Ι0>Θ(t(x)-t(y)) + <0ΙAν(y)Aμ(x)Ι0>Θ(t(y)-t(x)), where Θ is the Heaviside step function, where Θ(t(x)-t(y)) = 1 if t(x)-t(y) ≥ 0 and Θ(t(x)-t(y)) = 0 if t(x)-t(y) < 0 and similarly for Θ(t(y)-t(x)).

The relativistic equations describe on-shell spin 0, spin ½, and spin 1 particles all with a wave nature. They are the Klein-Gordon equation for spin 0 particles, (∂2/∂t2 – ∂2/x2)φ(x,t) + m2φ(x,t) = 0, the Dirac equation i∂ψ(x,t) = -iα*∂ψ(x,t) + βmψ(x,t) describing up and down spin ½ fermions, and the vector potential, A, in electromagnetic theory describing spin 1 photons. These equations have positive and negative energy-frequency components describing forward and backward time particles or waves. If time, t, in the negative energy state becomes –t, then the negative energy state looks a positive energy state, which is the basis of the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation. Introducing Lorentz invariance to quantum mechanics leads to a local and causal description of fields in space-time, antiparticles, and have the correct spin statistics. Since all physical measurements have local field operators that commute at space like separation, the negative energy states must be included and leads to positive and negative frequency states travelling forward and backward in time.

Maxwell’s equations for electromagnetic fields can be expressed in terms of the vector potential, A. In space, free of electrical charges and currents, the wave equation for the electromagnetic vector potential modes is (1/c2)∂2A/∂t2 – Laplacian A = 0. The general solution is a sum over all modes of single mode solutions where a single mode solution is A(r,t) = A(t)eikr + A*(t)e-ikr and kλ labels a distinct mode. Placing the single mode solution into the wave equation leads to the harmonic oscillator equation ∂2A(t)/∂t2 + ωk2A(t) = 0. The two solutions are the positive frequency and forward time solution given as A(t) = Aexp(-iωkt) and negative frequency backward time solution, A(t) = Aexp(+iωkt). Both energy solutions are taken into account for the energy levels associated with the harmonic oscillator. In quantum mechanics the harmonic oscillator is quantized and is described by discrete energy levels. The energy level of a quantum harmonic oscillator for a mode is determined from an eigenvalue equation +-Hꞁn> = nꞁn> and discretized with n, where n = 0, 1, 2 … The positive and negative energy levels are +-En = +-ħω(n + ½), where n > 0. In particular, n = 0, is the energy of the positive and negative energy ground state modes as +-E0 = +-(ħω0)/2. Due to negative energy and reversed time, the negative energy levels mirror those of the positive ones. Then, a negative energy excited state (n ≠ 0) corresponds to a real negative energy and a time reversed entity. The positive and negative frequency solutions of the relativistic equations for n ≥ 1 excited forward-backward time entities and the time ordering associated with the photon propagator are assumed to apply to, n = 0, ground states in the vacuum. There is then no fundamental dichotomy between on-shell and ground states in the vacuum without adding an extraneous theory of explanation.

In a static vacuum, there are sets of ground state positive-negative energy │E0>, │E0>* and momentum llP0l>, llP0l>*, eigenstates, with infinite spatial and temporal single frequency oscillations in space. From +-En = +-ħω/2 = +-hf/2, where 2πf/2 = ω/2, the frequency has an associated time defined +-T = +-(f/2)-1 = +-h/E. Momentum +-lPl and spatial displacement +-lQl relate to period and energy given as +-E = +-clPl and +-Tc = +-lQl. In a dynamic vacuum, processes occur with finite time and spatial intervals and ground states, ꞁψ>E,P and ꞁψ>E,P*, are no longer eigenstates but have energy, frequency, period, momentum, and spatial displacement distributions, +-ΔE, +-Δω, +-ΔT, +-lΔPl, and +-lΔQl having relations of, +-ΔT = h/(+-ΔE) +-ΔE = ħ(+-Δω/2) = +-clΔPl, and +-lΔQl = c(+-ΔT). +-ΔT and +-lΔQl are a measure of the temporal-spatial dynamics occurring in the vacuum. The speed of light, c, associated with electromagnetic ground states is determined by the vacuum in the same as for on-shell electromagnetic waves.

B) Hilgevoord-Uffink (H-U) time-energy and spatial displacement-momentum relations, distributions.

Let electromagnetic ground state positive and negative wave-packets be described by │ψt>, │ψt>*. Time states │ψt> and │ψt+τ> may be written as <ψt│U(τ)│ψt>, and │ψt>* and │ψt-τ>* as *<ψt│U(-τ)│ψt>*, where

U(t) = exp(-+iHt/ħ) is the unitary operator of the time evolution and H is the Hamiltonian. For the positive time case, define τρ as the smallest time when the absolute value of the integral │<ψ│U(τρ)│ψ>│ has decreased to 1 – ρ or │<ψ│U(τρ)│ψ>│ = 1 – ρ, with the condition 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1. │<ψ│U(τρ)│ψ>│ is the transition amplitude of the states and its square is the probability of finding the state ꞁψt+ρ> if it has been prepared in state ꞁψt> . The parameter ρ is the reliability that the states ꞁψ> and U(τρ)ꞁψ> can be distinguished. When states coincide the reliability is 0, ρ = 0, │<ψ│U(0)│ψ>│ = 1, and when orthogonal or distinguished the reliability is 1, ρ = 1, │<ψ│U(τ1)│ψ>│ = 0, where τ1 = +ΔT is the minimum time for orthogonality. The argument is verbatim for the negative energy and time states, -τρ. There is a Fourier transform between τρ and probability density of the energy distribution │<E│ψ>│2, or <ψ│U(τ)│ψ> = ∫ │<Eꞁψ>│2 e-iτE/ħ dE. A time-energy relation between τρ and the width of the energy distribution can be derived. Let +-WαE be the smallest energy width W such that │+-∫W│<+-Eꞁψ*(0)>│2 dE│ = α, where α <≈ 1. If α = 0.9, then 90% of the energy distribution is contained in the interval.

The H-U relation is given as τρWαE ≥ 2ħ arccos[(2 – α – ρ)/α] with ρ ≥ 2(1 – α) as derived from the Mandelstam-Tamm relation. It can be shown that the constant on the R.H.S. is the best possible for any state │ψ> having a complete set of energy ground states here with energies from Emin to the Planck energy EP. Define the time for orthogonality as τ1 = +-ΔT. Orthogonality implies │<ψ│U(+ΔT)│ψ>│ = │<ψt│ψt+ΔT>│ = 0, and for negative energy states│*<ψꞁU(-ΔT)ꞁψ>*│ = │*<ψtꞁψt-ΔT>*│ = 0, ρ = +1. The H-U time-energy relation becomes +-ΔT(+-WαE) ≥ 2ħ arccos[(1 – α)/α]. Inserting the relation, +-ΔT = h/+-ΔE, gives the energy width +-WαE ≥ [(+-ΔE)/π][arccos[(1 – α)/α]. Having α ≈ 1, arccos[(1 – α)/α] ≈ π/2 giving │+-WαE│≥ │+-ΔE/2│ and + WαE and -WαE or +-ΔE/2 are nearly contained in the states, │ψn> or │ψn>*.

Minimum resolution of position depends on the displacement, +-X, for distributions of x at positions x, and x +- X to be distinguishable or │ψx>, │ψx + X> and │ψx>*, │ψx – X>* are orthogonal. U(x) = exp(+-iPx) is a unitary operator of displacement and P is the operator of total momentum. Looking at the positive case, the overlap integral between a state and its spatially translated state is <ψ│U(x)│ψ>. Reliability of │<ψ│U(x)│ψ>│ = 1 – p. Distinguishability or orthogonality ρ = 1 is defined with +lΔQl = +X, as │(<ψ│U(+lΔQl)│ψ>│ = 0, and verbatim for the negative case, -lΔQl = -X. Indistinguishability is given by the relation │(<ψ│U(0)│ψ>│ = 1, ρ = 0. The temporal-spatial states are related by, +-ΔT = +-clΔQl, they pass through distinguishability and indistinguishability together on the quantum clock.

The Fourier transform relationship between X and probability density of momentum distribution │<Pꞁψ>│2 is │<ψ│U(X)│ψ>│ =∫│<Pꞁψ>│2 eixPdP. The width +-WPα of the momentum distribution is the smallest interval W such that │+-∫W ꞁ<P│ψ>│2 dPl = α. Making the substitutions, +-lΔQl = c(+-ΔT) = ch/+-ΔE, p = 1, +-ΔE = c(+-lΔPl), in the H-U relation +-lΔQl(+-WPα) ≥ 2ħ arccos[(2 – α – ρ)/α] gives the minimum momentum distribution +-WPα ≥ {2ħ arccos[(1 – α)/α]}/ch/(+-ΔE) giving WPα ≥ {lΔPl/π arccos[(1 – α)/α]}. With α ≈1, arccos[(1 – α)/α] ≈ π/2, and the momentum distribution │+-WPα│ ≥ │+-lΔPl/2│, and nearly contained in the ground states, │ψn> and │ψn>*.

The H-U relations are relativistic invariant when the Hamiltonian and total momentum operators are combined into a four vector. Time direction and energy are connected and share the same sign i.e. negative (positive) energy cannot move forward (backward) in time since there are no such solutions in the electromagnetic equations. Ground states in the negative realm with distributions, -ΔT, -ΔQ, –ΔP, and -ΔE operate oppositely to those in the positive realm, +ΔT, +ΔQ, +ΔP, and +ΔE but the spatial and momentum three-vectors allow for propagation of positive and negative states in any direction. Energy and time are proportional to momentum and spatial displacement where the constant of proportionality is given as +-lΔQl/+-ΔT = c = +-ΔE/+-lΔPl, where c is the constant speed of light. The energy and momentum along with displacement and time distributions have a constant ratio with the speed of light c and as a result pass through indistinguishability and distinguishability together.

C) Quantum clock and evolution of states. Relative orientations of positive-negative energy distributions.

Positive and negative temporal and spatial quantum clocks are defined as systems, where in the course of evolution, governed by positive or negative temporal and spatial parameters, a positive state │ψn> evolves to a distinguishable state │ψn+1>… at times and positions tn, tn+1 and qn, qn+1 …, where tn+1 > tn, and qn+1 > qn and a negative state │ψn>* evolves to a distinguishable state │ψn-1>*, where tn-1 < tn, qn-1 < qn, where the temporal and spatial resolution of distinguishable displacements are, Δt+- = +-(tn+1 – tn) = +-ΔT and Δq+- = +-(qn+1 – qn) = +-lΔQl. Positive and negative states │ψn>, │ψn>* have equal magnitude energy distributions.

The transition amplitudes │(*)<ψ│U(+-τρ)│ψ>(*)│ = 1 – ρ and│(*)<ψ│U(+-lΔQl)│ψ>(*)│ = 1 – ρ, where the negative sign corresponds to (*), describe evolution of forward and backward temporal and spatial quantum clocks. Evolution of forward time ground states is described as the transition │<ψt=0│ψt=0>│ = 1 to │<ψt=0│ψt=+ΔT>│ = 0 and backward time states as │*<ψt=0│ψt=0>*│ = 1 to │*<ψt=0│ψt=-ΔT>*│ = 0. The transitions of spatial states occur in lock-step, where +-ΔT becomes +-lQl. Let │<ψn│ψn>│ = │<ψt=0│ψt=0>│ and │*<ψnꞁψn>*│ = │*<ψt=0│ψt=0>*│ = 1, be defined as time n, which then evolves to │<ψn│ψn + 1>│ and │*<ψn│ψn – 1>*│ = 0 in time +-ΔT, becoming distinguished and at that time are in a condition of indistinguishability with states │ψn+1>, │ψn-1>* or │<ψn + 1│ψn + 1>│ and │*<ψn – 1│ψn – 1>*│ = 1 both defined as time n + 1 for forward and n – 1 for backward time. The states, │ψn+1>, │ψn-1>*, during time intervals +ΔT and –ΔT evolve from indistinguishability to distinguishability or │<ψn + 1│ψn + 2>│ and │*<ψn – 1│ψn – 2>*│ = 0, where there is indistinguishability of states │ψn + 2>, │ψn – 2>* or │<ψn + 2│ψn + 2>│ and │*<ψn – 2│ψn – 2>*│ = 1, both defined as n + 2 and n – 2 and so forth and so on.

Evolution of states, │ψn>, │ψn + 1>, │ψn + 2>… and │ψn>*, │ψn – 1>*, │ψn – 2>*… from an undistinguished to a distinguished condition as above all occur during time interval +-ΔT. Thus, none of the previous or future temporal and spatial states are relinquished to non-existence and all states are consecutively connected and ordered throughout the vacuum. During the condition │<ψt = 0│ψt = +-tρ>│ = 1 – ρ, where ρ ≠ 0 or 1, time n and time n + 1 or n – 1 cannot be determined with certainty. An analogy is a set of clock second hands representing all states moving on a clock without the numbers on the face, which only serves as a visual aid to help with telling time from the position of the hand relative to the face of numbers. The evolution of time and position can be surmised by the evolution of the hand relative to itself in time.

Consider negative backward time states │ψn + 1>*, │ψn>*, │ψn – 1>*, │ψn – 2>* and positive forward time states │ψn + 1>, │ψn>, │ψn – 1>, │ψn – 2> propagating at the speed of light in opposite directions reflecting their opposite time nature, where at one point in space-time during their relative evolution, the states are aligned. The spatial states │ψm + 1>*, │ψm>*, │ψm – 1>*, │ψm – 2>* and │ψm + 1>, │ψm>, │ψm – 1>, │ψm – 2>, are also aligned. In both cases they are defined as indistinguishable, │**<ψn│ψn>│ = 1, where │ψn>** represents time reversal of a negative energy state, │ψn>*. If time reversal is performed on a negative energy backward time distribution, or │ψn>* goes to │ψn>** = │ψn>, then the energy distribution is positive and forward time.

Let the backward spatial states propagate left while evolving from a time of n + 2, to n + 1, n, n – 1, n – 2, and the forward spatial states propagate right while evolving from a time of n – 2 to n – 1, n, n + 1, n + 2. Holding the forward time states stationary, the negative time state n + 1, evolves and propagates to time state n, while n evolves and propagates to time state n – 1 relative to the forward time state n, where the negative state evolving from n to n – 1 changes from indistinguishability, │**<ψn│ψn>│ = 1, to distinguishability, │**<ψn – 1│ψn>│ = 0 with respect to the positive state at n. Holding negative states stationary, the positive time state n – 1 evolves and propagates to time state n, while n evolves and propagates to time state n + 1 relative to the negative time state n undergoing indistinguishability to distinguishability. Then, as the positive and negative states evolve and propagate past each other in opposite directions, the positive time state n – 1 evolves and propagates to time state n during time +ΔT, while the negative time state n + 1 evolves and propagates to time state n during time –ΔT. Thus, a positive energy state evolving from the past to the future will correspond with a negative energy state evolving from the future to the past.

The positive and negative energy distributions +ΔE and –ΔE of ground states │ψn>, │ψn>* are linear functions of the frequency distributions +-Δω or +-Δf given as +-ΔE = +-ħ(Δω/2) = +-h(Δf/2) with a slopes ħ or h. Graphically, one end point of the energy distribution is +-│EMAX│ at +-│ωMAX│/2 or +-│fMAX│/2 and the other endpoint is +-│EMIN│ at +-│ωMIN│/2 or +-│fMIN│/2. The relative orientation of the positive and negative energy distributions result from a time reversal symmetry. Due to time reversal, the negative and positive energy distributions are in tandem at the same quantum time, have +│EMAX│ corresponding to -│EMIN│ and -│EMAX│ corresponding to +│EMIN│ or an indistinguishable positive and negative state, defined as │**<ψn│ψn>│ = 1. As they propagate oppositely in space-time, the positive and negative energy distributions do not cancel but superimpose into positive and negative energy waveforms with varying durations, where time cannot be determined with certainty defined as │**<ψn + -1│ψn>│ = 1 – ρ, where ρ has condition 0 < ρ < 1, until distinguishability, │**<ψn│ψn + – 1>│ or │**<ψn + -1│ψn>│ = 0 occurs. Momentum distributions are similar and behave with the same relationships given above since energy and momentum are related as +-ΔE = +-lΔPlc.

D) Proving Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation using thermodynamic irreversibility and acceleration in a gravity field. Quantum fluctuations

A positive energy-forward time positively charged electron or positron (anti-electron) is a negative energy backward time electron by the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation of positrons. Behavior such as a positron moving forward in time and direction losing energy and slowing when passing through lead seem to disprove the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation because a negative energy backward time electron moving in a reversed direction must speed up when passing through the lead gaining energy contrary to the thermodynamic behavior of solids. A positron reduces positive energy or equivalently absorbs negative energy given by +EFINAL < +EINITIAL and +EFINAL – (+EINITIAL) = -ΔE and slows in a forward time and space direction. The loss in positive energy to or taking negative energy from the solid increases its temperature. The negative energy electron, has equal but opposite energy to the positron and passes through the solid in a reversed time and direction having the negative energy relation –EFINAL < -EINITIAL and -EFINAL – (-EINITIAL) = -ΔE, where the past state of the negative energy electron coincides with the future state of the positron so that +EFINAL of the positron corresponds to –EINITIAL of the negative energy electron. The future state of the negative energy electron corresponds to the past state of the positron or –EFINAL corresponds to +EINITIAL. The negative energy electron loses positive energy or equivalently absorbs negative energy causing it to speed up and increase the temperature of the solid. The forward time positron and the backward time electron meet each other at all increments in time since as the positron moves in time increments from its past state to its future state, the negative energy electron moves from its past state, which is the future state of the positron, to its future state, which is the past state of the positron meeting the positron at all time increments in its past. The same holds for future time states of the positron. Thus, thermodynamic behavior is not compromised since positive energy is given up in both cases warming the solid.

A positron moving forward in time and direction accelerates toward a gravitational body and increases its positive kinetic energy or equivalently decreasing negative energy as shown in the relations, given as +EFINAL > +EINITIAL and +EFINAL – (+EINITIAL) = +ΔE, and the negative energy electron moving backward in time and direction have the relations -EINITIAL < -EFINAL and -EFINAL – (-EINITIAL) = +ΔE, where the initial and final labels are interchanged as above, increasing positive energy, which is equivalent to reducing its negative kinetic energy, implying that negative energy electron decelerates while moving away from the gravitational body backward in time and direction in tandem with positron as explained above. Thus, the interpretation in terms of positive energy positron and direction is consistent and identical to the interpretation in terms of a negative energy electron.

Quantum fluctuations can be described not as positive energy appearing and disappearing from nothing or the vacuum governed by some energy-time uncertainty principle, which technically does violate strict conservation of energy even for a short time but can be explained naturally as a spontaneous transfer of energy from a negative ground state to a positive ground state rendering both in a positive and negative excited energy state and then relax back to the ground state. The time interval of excitation existence is determined by the energy of the particular ground state involved by a relation similar to the uncertainty relation. The spontaneous excited ground states interact with on-shell entities in such a way that energy is imparted and removed or vice versa in such a way that energy is conserved without any net transfer of energy from the vacuum unless there is an input of external on-shell energy.

E) Vacuum field processes of dipole creation and annihilation analyzed with Feynman and quantum clock process and their comparison.

From above, the scattering event of an electron and positron has two probability amplitudes where M1 ≈ ∫d4x1d4x2[exp-ip1.x1][exp-ip2.x2](ig)[d4q/(2π)4][iexp(iq.(x1 – x2)gμν/q2](ig)exp(ip3.x1)exp(ip4.x2)(spinors are not present) and M2 is similar. The coupling g2 = α is the fine structure constant. The photon Feynman propagator is DF(x1 – x2) = ∫d4q/(2π)4iexp(iq.(x1 – x2)gμν)/[q2 + iε] and the exchange of momenta, +q2, in the energy-momentum conserving elastic interaction, where +q2 is time-like, describing electron-positron annihilation and creation with amplitude α.

Figure 4 diagrams the process of creation and annihilation of an positive electron and negative electron dipole using QED with time, t, and position, q, as reference markers needed for comparison to the process described by the quantum clock in Figure 5. Forward time is right and backward time is left.

The QED description in Feynman propagator theory that is charge neutral is a virtual positive frequency electron emerges from a scattering event with a virtual photon and propagates forward in time from vertex 1 to 2, where it is scattered from a virtual photon into a virtual negative energy electron, where it propagates backward in time to destroy itself at vertex 1. If the virtual negative frequency electron upon arriving at vertex 1 destroys the virtual positive frequency electron, then the dipole would not exist. Instead of annihilation of the positive electron at vertex 1, the virtual negative electron propagating from vertex 2 to 1 may not destroy itself by an unknown process but is scattered by the virtual photon into a virtual positive electron as shown in Figure 4, which is then a symmetric process. The process is charge neutral in that the positive electron at each moment in its future to its past position from vertex 2 to 1 is in tandem with the negative electron as it propagates backward in time or as the negative electron at each moment in time from vertex 1 to 2 it is in tandem with the positive electron as it propagates forward in time. The transient nature of the dipole would be due to the transient nature of the entire process. The Feynman propagator describes the emission (absorption) of a negative electron as equivalent to an absorption (emission) of a positive frequency forward time positron (anti-electron) so that, equivalently, the process for a positive electron and positron is creation of an electron-positron dipole pair from a virtual wave packet at vertex 1, where they propagate to vertex 2 and annihilate creating a virtual wave packet. The process consisting of two virtual wave-packets and a dipole is an isolated, and elementary process, in which these building blocks may connect to processes occurring in the future or past.

Figure 5 illustrate the quantum clock process of creation-annihilation of electromagnetic wave packets, positive electron and negative electron ground states. At t = -2, q = -2, an incoming positive energy ground state wave packet evolves to t = -1, q = -1 and annihilates creating a positive energy electron. The positive electron evolves to t = 0, q = 0 annihilates creating a positive wave-packet that evolves to t = +1, q = +1. Concurrent with positive evolution, a negative wave-packet evolves from t = +1, q = +1 to t = 0 and q = 0 and annihilates creating a negative energy anti-electron, which evolves to t = -1 and q = -1 and annihilates creating an outgoing negative wave packet evolving to t = -2, q = -2. The positive and negative electromagnetic ground states evolve until creation of another dipole reflected by the amplitude α, where the potential of a positive or negative electron is an enabler for the dipole process to exist concurrently.

The dipole structure is summarized by the following, which is similar to the QED description of dipole creation-annihilation. At t = -1, q = -1 a negative energy electron annihilates and a positive energy electron creates similar to the process at vertex 1 and at t = 0, q = 0 a positive energy electron annihilates and a negative energy negative energy anti-electron creates similar to vertex 2. The dipole pair exists between t = -1, q = -1 and t = 0, q = 0. Distinguishability and indistinguishability applies with respect to the positive-negative ground states at t, q = -2, -1, 0, +1 i.e. creation of the electron at t = -1 occurs at distinguishability with the wave-packet when t = -2 and indistinguishable with the annihilation of the wave-packet when time t = -1 or another is creation of a negative energy electron when t = 0 occurs at distinguishability with the negative energy wave-packet when t = +1 and indistinguishable with its annihilation when t = 0.

If in QED there were backward-forward time channels in the virtual photons to remove and add positive and negative time instead of a scattering process description, then the QED process is similar to the quantum clock process, which allows positive and negative forward-backward time channels in the ground state wave packets allowing for a removal and addition of forward-backward time to positive-negative electrons. A forward and backward time ground state wave-packet combination is equivalent to one virtual photon in QED. The QED description would then be negative time is transferred from a scattering event from the negative electron removing negative time while adding positive time to a positive electron and vice-versa. The quantum clock dipole processes is also an elementary building block with possible connections to past and future evolving electromagnetic ground states.

F) Definition of total charge, energy, time, and displacement. Time of existence and displacement parameters associated with the dipole and electromagnetic ground states.

Definition and conservation of total charge, energy, time, and spatial displacement during the quantum clock creation-annihilation process uses the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation. At t = -1, creation of an electron lowers charge, -e, while the annihilation of the negatively charged anti-electron raises charge, +e for zero net charge. At t = 0, annihilation of the electron raises charge while creation of the anti-electron lowers charge for zero net charge. The separated charges form a dipole between t = -1 and 0 that is charge neutral as in the Feynman propagator description of the dipole.

At t = -1, creation of a positive energy electron and annihilation of a negative energy electron raises energy by +ΔEe – (-ΔEe) = +2ΔEe, while at t = 0, annihilation of a positive energy and creation of a negative energy electron lowers energy by –ΔEe – (+ΔEe) = -2ΔEe conserving energy, where ΔEe = mec2. Total energy, +-2ΔEe, bifurcates into +ΔEe and –ΔEe between t = -1 and 0.

Ground state time and energy relate as +-ΔT = h/(+-ΔE). At t = -1, creation of an electron and annihilation of an anti-electron raises time +h/ΔEe – (-h/ΔEe) = +2h/ΔEe or +ΔT – (-ΔT) = +2ΔT. At t = 0, electron annihilation and anti-electron creation lowers time -h/ΔEe – (+h/ΔEe) = -2h/ΔEe or –ΔT – (+ΔT) = -2ΔT conserving time. Total time, +-2ΔT, is bifurcated into +ΔT and –ΔT between t = -1 and 0.

Displacement relates to time as +-ΔTc = +-lΔQl. At t = -1, creation of an electron and annihilation of an anti-electron raises displacement by +lΔQl – (-lΔQl) = +2lΔQl. At t = 0, annihilation of an electron and creation of an anti-electron lowers displacement by -lΔQl – (+lΔQl) = -2lΔQl conserving displacement. Total displacement, +-2lΔQl, bifurcates into +lΔQl and -lΔQl between t = -1 and 0.

The electron and anti-electron each have a fundamental measure of displacement, which is the Compton wavelength or +-λC = +-h/mec, having an associated momentum term, +-mec, unrelated to any external momentum vector. The two Compton regions, +λC and -λC, corresponds to the electron and anti-electron, respectfully, with total displacement +-λC – (-+λC) = +-2λC. At t = -1, creation of an electron and annihilation of an anti-electron raises spatial displacement by +λC – (-λC) = +2λC and at t = 0, annihilation of an electron and creation of an anti-electron lowers displacement by -λC – (+λC) = -2λC conserving total displacement. A net external energy-momentum input would separate the electron and anti-electron to a distance greater than +-2λC to where they are resolved and become on-shell.

The ground state time, +-ΔT = +-h/ΔEe = +-h/mec2, is related to the displacement given by ΔT = +-2λC/c = +-h/mec2. Total positive time of dipole existence is +ΔT – (-ΔT) = +2ΔT or +h/Δmec2 – (-h/Δmec2) = +2h/Δmec2 = +2λC/c. Thus, the total distance travelled at the speed of light in time 2ΔT is the total displacement of the dipole 2λC. The electron is associated with a Compton wavelength. Thus, the rest energy of the electron, ERELATIVISTIC = mec2, includes the momentum term, mec, in the Compton wavelength.

In order to create a positive (negative) energy electron the electromagnetic ground state wave-packet must carry positive (negative) energy at least equal to the rest energy of the positive (negative) electron. The energy of the electromagnetic ground states in the vacuum are not confined to the energy of the electron but encompasses an entire spectrum of energies near zero minimum to Planck energy. The positive or negative energy of the ground state, +-ΔE, relates to time of its existence as +-ΔT = h/(+-ΔE) since the electromagnetic ground state wave packet has a positive and negative energy channel the associated total time is +-ΔTTOT = +-2ΔT. The total displacement is +-2ΔTc = +-2lΔQl or +-ΔTTOTc = +- lΔQlTOT. If the electromagnetic ground state carries energy +-mec2, then total associated time, +-TTOT = +-2h/ mec2 and the total displacement equals +-TTOTc = +-2h/mec = +-2λC, equal to the transient ground state dipole.

2) Inelastic and elastic scattering supported by vacuum field processes.

A) Inelastic interaction involving ground states.

During a positive energy charged particle inelastic interaction, an on-shell electromagnetic wave-packet is emitted with probability α. The necessary condition satisfying inelastic interaction is having a positive energy distribution +ΔE equaling its corresponding three-momentum energy distribution as +ΔE = +lΔPlc giving the on-shell condition ΔE2 – lΔPl2c2 = q2 = 0, which has non-rest mass propagation. The inelastic process of emission and absorption satisfies conservation of energy-momentum without net transfer of vacuum to real energy. ΔE2 – lΔPl2c2 = 0 also applies to the corresponding positive energy excited ground state. The electric field between the particles creates a potential in the vacuum, which depends upon their proximity, where with probability α, energy in the amount of ħΔω is transferred from the negative energy ground state to the positive energy ground state producing a positive and negative excited ground states with energy +-(3ħ/2)Δω. There are then two on-shell wave-packets having energy +-ħΔω (n = 1), where the positive energy propagates from the interaction region and the positive state de-excites to the ground state, +(3ħ/2)Δω – (ħ/2)Δω = +(ħ/2)Δω, while a potential from the negative energy excited state absorbs kinetic energy +ħΔω from an outgoing particle de-exciting its state to the ground state, -(3ħ/2)Δω + ħΔω = -(ħ/2)Δω. Proximity of the interacting particles and the interaction energy change is related to ΔT and ΔE by the H-U relation.

B) Elastic interaction involving ground states.

If there is no energy emission and absorption from the interaction region, then the interaction is elastic with probability distribution in 1 – α. The energy distribution +ΔE and magnitude of three momentum distribution +lΔPlc is now related as ΔE2 – lΔPl2c2 = +-q2 ≠ 0, where there is internal exchange of energy and momentum. The exchange is weighted with 1/q2 so that the farther (closer) off-shell a ground state exchange is the less (greater) the probability of emission.

Having the electron-positron or electron-electron elastic interaction in the center of mass frame, where the mass of an electron equals the positron and the direction of approach is co-linear with equal but opposite velocities, gives for the momentum P1 = –P2. The energy and magnitudes of three-momentum for each incoming and outgoing particle are equal or E1 = E2 = E1’ = E2’ and lP1l = lP2l = lP1’l = lP2’l, conserving those quantities. There is a change in direction between the outgoing and incoming particles or P1P1’ and P2P2’. With P1 = –P2, P1’ = –P2’, an e- e- scattering has four-momentum qs = p1 – p1’ = (0, p1p1’) and for the exchange scattering it is qs = p1 – p2’ = (0, p1 p2’), where qs is space-like. For e- e+ scattering qs = p1 – p1’ = (0, p1p1’) and for the exchange interaction, or e- e+ annihilation, it is qt = p1 + p2 = (2E, p1 + p2) = (2E, p1p1) = (2E, 0), where qt is time-like. The momentum change transfer distribution, Δp, and energy transfer distribution ΔE are found in energy-momentum ground states and determined by incoming energy-momentum and proximity of the particles. The annihilation process is an energy exchange where there is no potential for three-momentum exchange, since Δqt = (2ΔE, 0) and Δp = 0. In e- e- or e+ e+ non-exchange scattering, only momentum, for example Δqs = (0, Δp), weighted 1/Δp2, is exchanged. There is no potential for an energy distribution exchange since ΔE is zero.

The proximity of the interacting particles for a given input energy determines the angle of scattering and introduces a field energy density, which creates a potential in the vacuum. In the case of e- e- or e- e+ non-exchange scattering, no energy distribution exchange is involved and the scattering momentum change is one-dimensional, Δp, which is an intrinsic opposite momentum change between the interacting particles. Momentum components of Δp depend on arbitrary coordinate systems and are not involved since ground state involvement is intrinsic. Momentum –Δp = -ħΔk from a negative ground state momentum distribution –Δp = -(ħ/2)Δk is transferred to a positive ground state momentum distribution +Δp = +(ħ/2)Δk placing both distributions in a positive and negative excited state +-Δp = +-(3ħ/2)Δk, where the distributions have a relation lΔQllΔpl = πħ with particle proximity, lΔQl. One incoming particle receives positive momentum change in the amount of +ħΔk while the other gives up momentum +ħΔk to the negative momentum potential receiving an equal but opposite negative momentum change. Both momentum distributions de-excite to ground states. The positive momentum ground state then propagates forward in time away from the interaction site while the negative momentum distribution propagates away backward in time. Since momentum is intrinsic and coordinate independent, there is radial superposition of directions to absorbers. Direction of detection is conveyed back to the interaction site by a backward time energy-momentum ground state from the absorber when an outgoing particle is detected reducing the scattering probability wave form there. The particle travels on a time-like path whereas the energy-momentum ground state travel on a light-like path. The potential of the particle interacts with the potential of the backward time ground state in its immediate vicinity altering its propagation path from one backward light cone to a complementary (perpendicular) one and so on along backward light cones following the path of the particle. The process occurs within the confines of the Compton wavelength of the particle and the wave-packet of the energy-momentum distribution so trajectories are directly untraceable. The process for forward time ground states is alternating paths on forward light cones. The particle undergoes a jittering motion as a result.

Potentials associated with greater field densities from closer proximity affects ground state momentum distributions corresponding to particle reversal. Within the largest momentum distribution are subsets of distributions that obey the analysis above (inelastic scattering is similar). Indistinguishable e- e- scattering involve two momentum distribution subsets, which are complements, where the sum of the difference between maximum and minimum momentum values in each subset equals the difference in the maximum distribution. As one subset increases the other decreases and when the two subsets pass through equal difference the designation as to which subset belongs to which outgoing particle and scattering angle is indistinguishable reflecting the quantum property. The e- e+ non-exchange scattering does not carry quantum indistinguishability and as a result there is only one subset. The probability from small scattering angle to the maximum angle decreases. The relation lΔQllΔpl = πħ or lΔQl = πħ/lΔpl shows that as the momentum spread lΔpl associated with larger momentum increases, the proximity distance lΔQl decreases as 1/lΔpl similar to the amplitude and probability (1/lΔpl)2 = 1/lql2 and ΔE2 – lΔpl2c2 determines the sign. For energy exchange, in e- e+ annihilation lΔTllΔEl = πħ and ΔT is the time associated with the interaction for either the annihilation or creation of one particle. Annihilation of a positive energy and creation of a negative energy electron gives an energy transfer +ΔE – (-ΔE) = 2ΔE. Then, 1/(2ΔE)2 = +1/q2. The exchange of momentum by excited ground states during an elastic interaction is described by D and is a time symmetric bound field due to no emission of wave-packets or particles from the interaction site.

The positive energy de-excited ground state travels forward in time along with the on-shell wave-packet while the negative energy de-excited ground state propagates backward in time from the interaction site. Direction of detection is relayed by a backward time ground state from the absorber when the on-shell wave-packet arrives back to the time of emission reducing the emission probability wave form. Despite having backward time ground states, emission-absorption events involving on-shell wave packets are time ordered. The ground state processes involved with transfer of energy from the outgoing particle to the outgoing on-shell wave-packet via excited ground states is time symmetric but the time ordering of emission and absorption coincides with DI since there is on-shell emission.

3) Entanglement from vacuum field ground state processes.

The positive and negative ground states evolve temporally and propagate spatially until another bifurcation of charge occurs with probability α. Then there are 137 evolving positive and negative electromagnetic ground states from annihilation of a dipole to creation of the next reflecting the probability α = 1/137. Consider a dipole creation-annihilation event. The second event associated with the reference dipole occurs again after 137 time periods and at position 137 times the electromagnetic ground state total displacement in a particular direction, where one time period is the total period of the dipole 2h/mec2 and the total displacement of the ground state is equal to (c)2h/mec2 = 2λC.

The positive and negative ground states evolve in time and propagate spatially possibly jumping from one set of connected ground states to another until another bifurcation of charge occurs with probability α.The evolutionary nature of electromagnetic and dipole ground states according to the quantum clock, which comprises the vacuum, forms the basis for the entanglement process in the vacuum. Due to positive and negative energy, a potential of binding between connected sets of positive and negative ground states, allows them to propagate and evolve oppositely along a common path. The vacuum is composed of positive and negative tandem connected sets of ground states randomly oriented in space, where two intersecting connected sets do not affect one another. The vacuum is a homogeneous mixture of connected sets with random temporal alignments and spatial directions. Positive and negative time and spatial states in the vacuum carry no absolute time or position and so only intrinsic ordering with arbitrary time and position is relevant in the vacuum. There is symmetry between a ground state and non-ground state forward and backward time and spatial processes.

As stated in postulate 2 on page 3, the vacuum processes support quantum entanglement of real particles and electromagnetic wave-packets. Entanglement of two electromagnetic wave-packets occurs during rapid emissions due to a cascade process of two decaying energy levels in an atom or spontaneous down conversion in a non-linear transparent crystal to name two. Real particles such as electrons can be entangled in solid state processes currently being researched for quantum computing. Support for entanglement utilizes backward and forward time components of ground states, which satisfy locality so there is no need for a space-like connection. Polarization reduction and detection for a given orientation of the polarizer occurs at a precise time for the on-shell wave-packet, positive and a set of negative ground states with various frequency intervals. The polarization reduction of the forward-backward time ground states is possible by requiring the positive energy on-shell wave-packet state to have a potential. Without an external potential, the vacuum is homogeneous with states randomly jumping to other connected set of states and the potentials associated with ground states have no tendency to sustain an increase in density. The on-shell wave-packet operating on the ground states introduces a non-homogeneity with a cylindrical grouping of all ground states without random jumping along a common segment on the forward-backward light cones defined as a bundle. The on-shell wave-packet is absorbed after measurement whereas the ground states are not. The positive energy ground state propagates onward into the future with a reduced polarization. The reduced state of the forward time ground state is not unreduced by another ground state with a polarization superposition since they contain one polarization state which matches. The matching polarization state then has predominate influence over the unmatched states. If the reduced positive ground state incidents with a reduced ground state with a different or matching single orientation, then both states are unaffected and in the case of a match the states are indistinguishable. The reduced set of negative ground states propagate from time of measurement to emission. Backward time ground states from the absorber are in the vicinity of the backward time displaced on-shell wave-packet and ground state at all instants from measurement and detection to emission. The negative and positive ground states along with the on-shell wave-packet reduce their mutual polarizations. The backward ground states then propagate onward from the emission site into the past and affect the polarization of other ground states in the same way. The on-shell wave-packet anywhere on its path will have the corresponding reduced polarization outcome at the time of measurement regardless of when the polarizer setting is changed. Emission-absorption have a past-future relation at any relative location and distance where one reduced negative state arrives at the interaction site during emission, while those reduced earlier or later will not arrive at emission time. If there is no absorption and measurement, then there is no backward time reduced state and propagation probability reduction. The reduced set of negative ground states propagate from time of measurement to emission. Backward time ground states from the absorber are in the vicinity of the backward time displaced on-shell wave-packet and ground state at all instants from measurement and detection to emission. The negative and positive ground states along with the on-shell wave-packet reduce their mutual polarizations. The backward ground states then propagate onward from the emission site into the past and affect the polarization of other ground states in the same way. The on-shell wave-packet anywhere on its path will have the corresponding reduced polarization outcome at the time of measurement regardless of when the polarizer setting is changed. Emission-absorption have a past-future relation at any relative location and distance where one reduced negative state arrives at the interaction site during emission, while those reduced earlier or later will not arrive at emission time. If there is no absorption and measurement, then there is no backward time reduced state and propagation probability reduction. Non-bundled ground states on different light cones crossing the bundle perpendicularly are reduced by a mutual tipping of light cones when in the vicinity of the non-homogeneous potential allowing components of each other polarization states to interact in the manner described above. When two bundles cross, polarization interaction occurs in the same way. When polarizations match there is indistinguishability between the two bundles and emission-absorption sites provided the on-shell wave-packets are similar. Positive and negative energy ground states travel along light-like world lines in space-time on forward and backward light cones. The particle having non-zero rest mass travels on time-like world lines with slopes contained within the light cones. As opposed to the inelastic interaction, there is non-zero rest mass propagation. To unify the process with the inelastic process having cohesiveness and uniqueness with a non-zero rest mass particle and backward-forward time ground states, the particle must have a potential. The particle at a position backward in time by a small increment, -t1, from the absorber is not yet measured and its superposition state is not reduced. The particle at –t1 is not on the backward light cone of the absorber but a backward time ground state reduced at the absorber is in the vicinity of the particle at –t1. The particle at -t1 is not on the forward light cone of its position further back in time by an additional small increment at –t2. A non-reduced forward time ground state is then in the vicinity of the particle at –t1. The forward and backward light cones are on non-intersecting paths with the particle at –t1. In three dimensional space at one time, the vacuum is distorted or non-homogeneous due to its potential with associated tipping of the forward-backward light cones inward around the particle. Ground states on complementary (right angle) forward-backward light cones crossing the non-intersecting light cones in the vicinity of the particle potential also have their light cones tipped. The complementary light cones passing through the particles are not tipped. In all cases due to tipping of light cones there is a component of polarization of the non-intersecting light cones in the complementary forward-backward light cones. Reduction of a superposed state is described by the mechanism developed in the inelastic case. The reduced backward time ground state from measurement at a particular time reduces the backward time superposed ground state on the complementary backward light cone which then reduces the particle at –t1. The positive non-reduced ground state from the particle position at –t2 passes a non-reduced state to a non-reduced positive ground state on the complementary forward light cone which moves to the vicinity of the particle at –t1 and becomes reduced by the backward time ground state. All ground states on their forward-backward light cones involved in the reduction process at –t1 propagate onward away from the vicinity of the reduced particle and its potential and affect other ground states described above in the inelastic case. The particle and positive ground state reduction at all times in the past from the absorber are in tandem with the reduced backward time ground state on the non-intersecting and complementary light cones path mechanism from absorber to interaction site. Due to the external potential of the particle and its associated integrity of the backward-forward time of ground states, the particle anywhere on its path has the corresponding reduced polarization outcome precisely at the time of measurement regardless of when the polarizer setting are changed. (Figure 3). Higher positive and lower negative energy states with a relatively shorter time periods and a smaller wave-packet respond to a greater degree and are closer to the particle than smaller magnitude distributions with longer periods and large wave-packets. Due to the potential of the particle there is a change of the quantum time distribution from a homogeneous condition in empty vacuum to inhomogeneous condition in the vicinity of the particle or wave-packet. The relation of the vacuum wave-packets appear to be one where they are redshifted farther away and blue-shifted when closer to the particle potential.

As discussed earlier, the quantum entanglement connection was demonstrated to be a non-local space-like connection. An instantaneous connection was not ruled out and became the view taken. Because of this, the question of causality comes into view where a cause must always precede all of its effects in any frame of reference ruling out space-like transmission of macroscopic, microscopic communication, correlated quantum influence, and closed time loops. In terms of quantum correlation, there is no space-like transmission of information in the sense of radio, television, computer code, etc. Quantum correlation is not a form of communication since the measurements at each detector are random and in order to compare and find correlation the results of detections must be carried by null-like or time-like means that obey causality. Due to the non-local quantum connection causality is violated. This is the form of strong causality. Weak causality is similar in that cause precedes an effect in all reference frames but it supports microscopic backward time processes.

In the quantum entanglement connection developed below, the vacuum contains electromagnetic ground states, which have components travelling forward and backward in time on forward and backward light cones due to the presence of positive and negative frequency components in the equation for the vector potential. The forward-backward time components, which are not directly traceable, where the forward time ground states link the emitter of both correlated quanta to the detectors and the backward time ground states link the measurements of the detectors back to the emitter when the quanta were emitted to each the other through the source The forward and backward time connections from source to detector are then null-like and there is no field which supports space-like transmission. The non-local and instantaneous nature of the entanglement connection can be shown mathematically as the resultant vector resulting from the addition of forward and backward time vectors. Thus, causality is upheld since there is physically no space-like transmission of quantum results by any field. The transmission of quantum results are through null-like channels.

4) Derivation of vacuum energy density and cosmological constant.

A) Mechanics of charges in the Compton wavelength, charge separation and transient dipole as a dipole antenna. Average emitted energy.

Position and motion on various trajectories of constituent particles comprising a transient dipole is unknown and unmeasurable as well as the relative configuration of their electromagnetic fields. As a result, electromagnetic emissions cannot be determined. It is also unknown as to the dynamics of dipole creation and annihilation concomitant with their Compton wavelengths. The only facts are, there is creation and annihilation of charge separation associated with the dipole having a fundamental total time of existence, 2h/ΔEe, and, also, associated with the dipole, a total Compton wavelength, 2λC/c, composed of fundamental constants, h, me, c, within which there is a constant momentum term, mec, assigned to each charged constituent particle implying constant velocity generating no electromagnetic emission.

Constant momentum is independent of transient charge separation. Charge separation also occurs in a dipole antenna with emission of electromagnetic radiation. Assume that the creation and annihilation of separated charge in a transient dipole is represented by separation and recombination of oppositely charged currents in a dipole antenna having dimensions proportional to the total Compton wavelength of the dipole. Then, the transient dipole emits electromagnetic radiation.

According to the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation a negative energy backward time anti-electron with negative charge can be represented as a positive energy forward time anti-electron with positive charge. Then, all negative sign operations are changed to positive sign operations. Dipole charge separation is then the separation and recombination of negative and positive charge, which is used for comparison to the forward time observed behavior of a dipole antenna.

Separation and recombination of opposite charge in the transient dipole is assumed to be equivalent to one-half cycle of a sinusoidal alternating current in the antenna, which emits an electromagnetic wave (the same is true if backward time anti-electrons interpretation is used, however). Parameters of the dipole antenna are determined only by fundamental relations used in the transient dipole, which are total Compton wavelength with its constant momentum term, total time determined from the fundamental ground state energy and frequency relation, along with the vacuum impedance.

Average radiative power and energy from the dipole, relation to the fine structure constant.

The average radiative power of an infinitesimal dipole antenna is given by:

PRAD = η0(π/3)(I0L/λ)2, where η0 is the electromagnetic wave impedance of the vacuum, I0 is electric current, L is the length of the dipole antenna, and λ is the emitted wave length.

PRAD = (1/2)I02RRAD and so RRAD = 2PRAD/I02 = η0(2π/3)(L/λ)2 where RRAD is the total antenna resistance. The value of η0 is 120π = 1/ε0c = 377 ohm, where ε0 is the permittivity of the vacuum and c is the speed of light. Using 120π, RRAD =120π(2π/3)(L/λ)2 = 80π2(L/λ)2. So PRAD = I02(40π2)L22, where 40π2 = 394 ohm.

The antenna when compared to the transient dipole contains no physical wire implying no resistance to electric current. The resistance associated with the antenna is then due to the impedance of the vacuum to the electromagnetic wave and the ratio of the length of the dipole antenna to the wavelength emitted, which is (377ohm)(L/λ)2. Then, 40π2 is replaced by 1/cε0. Using the vacuum impedance of 1/ε0c, PRAD = I020c(L/λ)2 and with (1/2π)(2π/λ) = (1/2π)k = (1/2π)ω/c, the relations for the average power of the infinitesimal antenna is given as:

PRAD = I020c(L/λ)2 or equivalently as [I02L2ω2]/[4π2ε0c3].

The current I0 is defined as the (number of positive or negative charges per volume)X(number of charges passing through an area)X(the speed of the charge, v)X(the unit of charge, q). The speed of the electric charge is determined by the momentum term, mec, in the Compton wavelength relation, λC = h/mec, where me is the rest mass of the electron and is set equal to an equivalent relation involving the relativistic mass of the electron multiplied by a speed, v, which is less than the speed of light.

Then mec = meγv and c = v/(1 – v2/c2)1/2 implying c2 = v2c2/(c2 – v2) or 1 = v2/(c2 – v2), which gives for the speed of the electric charge v = c/(2)1/2. There is one electric charge per volume of λC3 or 1/λC3. The charge passes through an area of λC2, and the unit of charge is q = 1.6X10-19C. Then, the electric current I0 is given as (1/λC3)(λC2)(c/(2)1/2)(q) = (c/(2)1/2)(q)/λC = [(3X108m/s)/(2)1/2](1.6X10-19C)/(2.42X10-12m) = 14.0 Ampere.

The dipole antenna length, L, equals the total dipole displacement of 2λC = 4.84X10-12m and the angular frequency is ω = 2πf. The frequency, f, equals ½(2T)-1 = 1/4T, where 2T = 2h/mec2 is the total time associated with the lifetime of the dipole. The lifetime of the dipole is one-half of a cycle of the dipole antenna. A full cycle of the antenna is then 4T = 4h/mec2 with angular frequency ω = 2πf = 2π/4T = π/2T, equaling π/2(8.1X10-21s) = 1.94X1020/s. The emitted wavelength, λ = c/f = 4cT = 4(3X108m/s)(8.1X10-21s) = 9.72X10-12m. L = 2λC = 4.84X10-12m. Thus, L/λ ≈ ½.

The quantities, I0, ε0, L, c, ω, λ, in the relation for the average power of the infinitesimal antenna are:

I0 = 14.0 Amp ε0 = 8.85X10-12C2/N-m2 L = 4.84X10-12m c = 3.0X108m/s ω = 1.94X1020/s λ = 9.72X10-12m

Then the average power of electromagnetic wave emission using [I02L2ω2]/[4π2ε0c3] is given by:

PRAD = [(14.0Amp)2(4.84X10-12m)2(1.94X1020/s)2]/[4π2(8.85X10-12C2/N-m2)( 3.0X108m/s)3] = 1.83X104J/s.

PRAD = 1.83X104J/s.

Average radiated energy ERAD = PRAD(2T) = (1.83X104J/s)(1.62X10-20s) = 2.96X10-16J.

1) ERAD = 2.96X10-16J.

The frequency of the dipole antenna is given by f = 1/4T = ¼(8.1X10-21s)-1 = 3.09X1019/s. Let the equivalent energy of the prevalent associated quanta be E = hf = (6.626X10-34J-s)(3.09X1019/s) = 2.05X10-14J. The emitted energy quanta has 69.3 times the average emitted energy from the dipole antenna. The product of a probability of emission and energy value in an ensemble gives the average energy. If the value of the prevalent probability is consistently 1/69.3 = 0.0144 (≈2α = 0.0146, α is the fine structure constant) along with the energy of the quanta of 2.05X10-14J, then the average energy is 0.0144(2.05X10-14J) = 2.96X10-16J. Equivalently, the dipole antenna can be described as emitting a quanta having energy 2.96X10-16J with probability one. This particular average energy occurs for single dipole antenna emissions since the presence of many other dipoles with electromagnetic wave emissions interfere with random phases in the vacuum reducing the electromagnetic energy or quantum mechanical probability of finding dipole antenna average energy quanta as discussed next.

As a curious aside, the equivalent energy of a quanta having the average radiative energy of the dipole antenna, which is ERAD = 2.96X10-16J, gives a frequency of ERAD/h = 4.47X1017/s using the energy quanta relation E = hf. Time of existence of the transient dipole is 2T = 1.62X10-20s. The product of the frequency of quanta associated with the average energy emitted by the dipole antenna to the time of existence of the transient dipole, (fAVERAD)(2T) = (4.47X1017/s)(1.62X10-20s) = 7.24X10-3. The value of the dimensionless fine structure constant α ≈ 1/137 = 7.29X10-3. The percentage error is 0.69%. The fine structure constant may have relation to the total time of dipole existence and its equivalent dipole antenna average energy.

B) Energy or probability reduction of emitted electromagnetic wave.

The classical dipole antenna emits electromagnetic waves, where the amplitude squared is related to energy and its radiative pattern. In quantum mechanics, the electromagnetic wave amplitude squared is not energy, which depends upon frequency, but the probability of finding energy quanta at any particular location. The vacuum contains a large number of electromagnetic waves or probability amplitudes emitted from dipole antennas that superimpose with random phases everywhere in the vacuum. The result of the superposition is destructive interference with reduction of electromagnetic wave or probability amplitude. The reduction of the electromagnetic amplitude reduces the probability of finding emitted energy quanta at the dipole antenna and in intervening vacuum regions.

The wavelength of the emitted electromagnetic wave is 4λC. The destructive interference has an interval of uncertainty associated with the positive and negative electrical or probability amplitudes and transition point assumed to be given by the total spatial displacement of a dipole or 2λC. The maximum and minimum uncertainty of the resultant electrical amplitudes are assumed proportional to the two dimensionless spatial displacement components +-λC/m derived from the total spatial displacement of the dipole given as 2λC = +λC – (-λC), where m is the unit meter. The reduced amplitudes, +-EAMPRED, are given by +-EAMPRED = E0(+-λC/m), where E0 is the undiminished amplitude of emission. Energy or probability reduction is proportional to the amplitude squared or EAMPRED2. The energy or probability reduction PRED is defined PRED = EAMPRED2/E02 = [E02(+-λC/m)2]/E02 = (λC/m)2 = 5.86X10-24. Superimposed waves having equal amplitudes emitted and traveling undiminished from dipole antennas result in the probability reduction PRED.

Emitted electromagnetic waves from a dipole antenna spread over an increasing spherical area due to increasing radius with positive time reducing energy or probability of finding an energy quanta per constant cross sectional area covering the surface. PRED is then further reduced by a factor FRED, which is a fraction, dependent upon spherical surface area and the dipole density reduction factor, α. The cross section of a central dipole antenna, proportional to the total uncertainty, (2λC)2, is linearly linked through the emitted expanding wave to all cross sections, (2λC)2, of electromagnetic ground states and dipoles in the neighboring three-dimensional vacuum, which are projected onto a particular spherical surface in the neighboring vacuum reflecting the average reduction of wave energy or probability amplitude to each cross section on the surface.

Dipole antennas are created and annihilated and recreated after 137 space and time steps, 2λC and 2T, of the connected set of electromagnetic ground states. Then, each dipole created, emits an electromagnetic wave that propagates out 137 spatial steps in 137 time steps with a reduction in amplitude before a subsequent emission. At any particular time, there are neighboring dipoles anywhere from 1 to 137 spatial steps of the electromagnetic ground states from any dipole antenna undergoing similar process, governed by α ≈ 1/137, which defines the extent of the local neighborhood to any central dipole.

In the local neighborhood, dipoles and electromagnetic ground states have distances of separation from (2λC) to 137(2λC) from a central dipole. The average radial distance of separation from an emitting dipole antenna to its local neighboring dipole antennas and intervening vacuum is (2λC)(1 + 137)/2 = 69(2λC) defining the spherical surface area onto which the electromagnetic ground states and dipoles in the neighboring three-dimensional vacuum are projected reflecting the location for the average reduction of wave energy or probability amplitude to each cross sectional area in the neighboring volume.

The reduction of PRED is equivalent to having a smaller uncertainty interval determining amplitude. The least reduction in energy or probability amplitude occurs in the local neighborhood. Then, PRED is reduced by the largest fractional factor and the probability amplitudes associated with larger diminished amplitudes emitted from greater distances are reduced by a smaller fraction. Thus, the associated uncertainty is within the dominating uncertainty of the local neighborhood and non-measurable. Then, FRED, of the local neighborhood along with dipoles with their local neighborhoods establish the probability reduction factor, FRED, throughout the vacuum.

FRED, due to the distance of the spherical surface of projection in the local neighborhood from a central dipole antenna and 1/α is defined as the ratio of the central dipole cross section, to the number of cross sections covering the spherical area having the average radius 69(2λC) or 2λC2/4π69(2λC2) = 1/4π(69)2.

Due to the dipole antenna emission pattern, the total spherical area of coverage is approximately ½. Then FRED = 1/4π692/2 = 2/4π692 = 1/2π(69)2 = 3.34X10-5.

The total energy or probability reduction, PTOT, due to the fundamental uncertainty of 2λC and to the link distance is given as, PTOT = (PRED)(FRED) = (λC/m)2/2π(69)2 = (2.42X10-12)2(3.34X10-5) = 1.96X10-28.

2) PRED = 1.96X10-28.

The vacuum density of dipole antennas or #/m3 is equal to [(2λC)3]-1/137 = [137(2λC)3]-1, where 2λC is the total displacement of a dipole. The density of dipole antennas, given as #/m3 = [137(2(2.42X10-12m))3]-1 = 6.44X1031/m3 (see appendix for details).

3) #/m3 = 6.44X1031/m3.

C) The vacuum energy density depends only upon the charge of a constituent particle in the transient dipole and is independent of its mass.

Average emitted energy from a dipole antenna is invariant to mass.

Assume that the probability of creation and annihilation of an electron and anti-electron pair is one and that the relative probability of formation of other dipoles, where the constituent particles have mass nme is 1/n. Both electrical charges are equal.

Then, λn = λe/n, Tn = Te/n, ωn = nωe, and In = nIe

Energy, En = [In2Ln2ωn2]/[4πε0c3]2Tn = [(n2Ie2)(Le2/n2)(n2ωe2)]/[4πε0c3]2Te/n = nEe. Then, En = nEe.

The relative probability of the dipole energy emission with particle mass nme is 1/n. So En(1/n) = nEe/n = Ee. The net result is that the occurrence of greater energy, En = nEe occurs 1/n as often and its average is equal to the emission due to the electron, n = 1, and thus is invariant to the mass in the dipole antenna.

The density of dipole antenna emitters is invariant to mass.

#/m3e = [(2λe)3137]-1 and #/m3n = [(2λn)3137]-1 = [(2λe/n)3137]-1.

Having a relative probability of 1/n of occurrence for particles of mass nme, implies that there are n times of occurrences with probability 1/n, before the appearance of the particle with probability one. Then 2λn becomes 2nλn and #/m3 = [(2nλn)3137]-1 = [(2nλe/n)3137]-1 = [(2λe)3137]-1 = #/m3e and the density of dipole antennas is invariant to mass of the constituent particles in the dipole. The size of the dipole having constituent particles with mass nme is (2λe/n)3 and leads to greater density of dipoles but the probability decreases the density in such a way that it takes n constituent particles to equal 2λe and density equality.

Energy or probability reduction is effectively invariant to mass.

ERED depends upon the uncertainty determined by 2λe multiplied by the reduction factor FRED that is independent of dipole mass, that is, 2λe2/4π69(2λe2) = 2λn2/4π69(2λn2) = 1/4π692. Having a mass of nme would imply that the uncertainty is determined by 2λn = 2λe/n, where 2λn < 2λe/n. Then, the uncertainty 2λn is contained within the uncertainty 2λe, which cannot be meaningfully measured and would be irrelevant. ERED is then effectively invariant to mass of the constituent particles in the dipole.

D) Calculation of Cosmological Constant.

Then, the product, (En)(ERED n)(#/m3n) = (Ee)(ERED e)(#/m3e), the vacuum energy density, is independent of the dipole mass dependent only on the charge determining the energy emitted from the dipole antenna.

As determined from the tables of leptons, mesons, and baryons given by the Particle Data Group, there are 3 types of single charged leptons, 76 types of single charged mesons, 37 types of single charged baryons, and 7 types of double charged baryons. It is assumed that these particles have anti-particles and form transient dipoles. Charge enters into the calculated energy emission from a dipole antenna as charge squared. Then, double charged baryons enter into the calculated energy emission and vacuum energy density as four times the energy emission from a single charge. The effect of 7 double charged baryons contribute 7(22) = 28 times. Adding the total effectiveness of the 116 types of single charged particles and 7 types of double charged baryons, 28, gives a total of 144.

The total vacuum energy density, ρVAC, is given by [(I02L2ω2)/4πε0c3][2T][(λC/m)2/2π(69)2][(2λC)3137]-1[144] = (2.96X10-16J)(1.96X10-28)(6.44X1031/m3)(144) = 5.37X10-10J/m3, where [(I02L2ω2)/4πε0c3][2T] is the average unhindered energy or probability wave emission of the dipole antenna, [(λC/m)2/2π(69)2] is the reducing factor to the emitted electromagnetic energy or probability of finding an emitted energy quanta at a particular space-time location, and [(2λC)3137]-1 is the density of dipole antennas, and 144 is the effect on vacuum energy density due to the charged particle and anti-particle dipoles.

4) Total vacuum energy density is 5.37X10-10J/m3.

The cosmological constant Λ = 8πρVAC = 8π(5.37X10-10J/m3) = 1.35X10-8J/m3. The best measured value from satellite data is 1.351X10-8J/m3, which equals the calculated value to 3 significant figures.

5) Cosmological constant is 1.35X10-8J/m3.

The result supports the concept total time and total displacement using the Stückleberg-Feynman interpretation as well as supporting the number of evolving electromagnetic ground states in space-time governed by a quantum clock from dipole annihilation to dipole creation determined by the fine structure constant. This in turn supports the structure of the quantum entanglement connection consisting of the evolution of positive energy-forward time and negative energy-backward time electromagnetic states governed by a quantum clock of the quantum entanglement connection whether or not there is dipole creation and annihilation involved.

E) Appendix with examples.

Given a number of states where one state is a dipole and the others are non-dipole states at each position on a three dimensional lattice, the probability of any number of dipoles on the three dimensional lattice from 0 to the number of positions, developed by the author (Bradford) is:

Probability of number of dipoles a or Pa = [(S – 1)n – a(n!/a!(n – a)!]/Sn, and the mean number of dipoles is n/S.

  1. n is the number of positions in three dimensional space or number in one dimension cubed.
  2. a is the number of dipoles.
  3. (n – a) is the number of non-dipole positions.
  4. S is the total number of states, which is 1 dipole state plus non-dipole states S – 1.

Example one is 3 positions in 1-D or 33 = 27 positions in 3-D and 4 states per position. The probability is given as Pa = [327 – a(1.0889X1028/a!(27 – a)!]/1.8014X1016.

# dipoles a probability Pa # dipoles a probability Pa

27 5.55X10-17 13 5.326X10-3

26 4.4964X10-15 12 0.0138

25 1.75359X10-13 11 0.0311

24 4.38399X10-12 10 0.0605

23 7.8912X10-11 9 0.1008

22 1.0890X10-9 8 0.143

21 1.1979X10-8 7 0.172

20 1.0781X10-7 6 0.172

19 8.086X10-7 5 0.141

18 5.1209X10-6 4 0.091

17 2.765X10-5 3 0.0459

16 1.282X10-4 2 0.0165

15 5.128X10-4 1 3.81X10-3

14 1.775X10-3 0 4.23X10-4

The mean calculated by ∑aPa ≈ 6.7506 and the mean given by n/S where n = 27 and S = 4 is 27/4 = 6.75.

Example two is n = 8 and S = 10 then Pa = 98-a8!/a!(8 – a)!/108

# dipoles a probability Pa

8 1X10-8

7 7.2X10-7

6 2.27X10-5

5 4.082X10-4

4 4.593X10-3

3 0.033

2 0.149

1 0.383

0 0.43

Mean = ∑aPa ≈ 0.8006 Mean n/S = 8/10 = 0.8

The mean n/S is used in the case where there are dipole as well as electromagnetic ground non-dipole states. The effect is a lowering of the density of dipoles according to the number S – 1 of non-dipole states plus 1 dipole state, where the total is S – 1 + 1 = S when a condition of all positions n in 3-D space at one time are filled with dipoles by definition of space filling dipole density.

Dipole as well as non-dipole states evolve in space-time according to the quantum clock. Consider the evolution where after annihilation of a dipole there is a space-time succession of S – 1 non-dipole states until on the Sth succession a dipole is created. Given this, what is the reduced density of dipoles if all positions n in 3-dimensional space at one time were occupied with dipoles? The solution is n/S.

As an example let there be n = 27 (33) positions in 3-D space with volume, 1 m3, at one time. Let there be S = 9 states. Then, after annihilation of each dipole, there will be a space-time evolution of 8 non-dipole states and creation of a dipole on the 9th step. If there are no non-dipole states, then after each time increment of the quantum clock, there would be dipoles at all 27 positions in 3 space. Introducing non-dipole states into the evolution will lower the density of dipoles at any one time. The density with non-dipole states added is (n/m3)/S = (27/m3)/9 = 3 dipoles/m3.

The problem at hand, is calculating the density of dipoles when the probability of dipole formation and annihilation is the fine structure constant, α ≈ 1/137. It was assumed that after annihilation of a dipole there is a space-time evolution according to the quantum clock of 136 non-dipole electromagnetic ground states until a dipole state is created on the 137th evolution step, S = 137, to achieve a probability of 1 for dipole creation. The number of positions, n, in 3 space at any one time is 1373. According to the general formula, the probability of a dipoles in 3 space is Pa = 136Exp(1373 –a)1373!/a!(1373 – a)!/137Exp(1373), which is a formidable equation to calculate and find the mean value. The number of dipoles without non-dipole states is 1373. The mean number of dipoles with 136 non-dipole states and 1 dipole state, S = 137, is n/S = 1373/137 = 1372. In term of dipoles with total spatial displacement 2λC the number of dipoles present per m3 assuming that there are no non-dipole states is [(2λC)3]-1 = 8.82X1033dipoles/m3. Having 136 non-dipole states plus 1 dipole state for a total of 137 states reduces the density of dipoles to [(2λC)3]-1/137 = 6.44X1031dipoles/m3.


  1. Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions. Gregor Weihs et al. Feb 2008
  2. Violation of Local Realism with Freedom of Choice. Thomas Scheidl et al. Sept 2010
  3. Bell Violation with Entangled Photons, Free of the Fair-Sampling Assumption. Marissa Giustina et al. 2013
  4. Bell Violation with Entangled Photons, Free of the Coincidence-Time Loophole. Jan-Ake Larson et al. Jan 2014
  5. Testing Spooky Action at a Distance. D Salart et al. Aug 2008
  6. Experimental Demonstration of Quantum-Correlations over more than 10 Kilometers. W Tittel et al. Feb 2008
  7. Entanglement Distribution over 300 Kilometers of Fiber. Takahiro et al
  8. What is the Speed of Quantum Information? Robert Garisto 0212078v1
  9. Quantum Electrodynamics. Walter Greiner-Joachim Reinhardt 2003
  10. Field Quantization. Walter Greiner-Joachim Reinhardt
  11. Quantum Field Theory of Point Particles and Strings. Brian Hatfield 1991
  12. The Time-Energy Uncertainty Relation. Busch Jan 2007 0105049v3
  13. Fourier analysis. Elias Stein and Rami Shakarchi, Princeton University Press 2003
  14. Positronium: Review of Symmetry, Conserved Quantities, and Decay for the Radiological Physicists. Michael Harpen Dept of Radiology 2451 Fillingim St, Mobile, Alabama 36617.
  15. Phase Conjugated Feynman Diagrams. Douglas White Ph.D,, 2005.
  16. Rate of Evolution of a Quantum State. Jos Uffink University of Utrecht Nov. 1992.
  17. The Uncertainty Principle for Energy and Time. Jan Hilgevoord Utrecht University June 1996.
  18. The Uncertainty Principle for Energy and Time. II Jan Hilgevoord Utrecht University Oct 1997.
  19. Time in Quantum Mechanics. Jan Hilgevoord Utrecht University Nov 2001.
  20. Uncertainty Principles in General. Jeremy Butterfield Trinity College Cambridge 2012.
  21. Fine-Structure Constant Wikipedia
  22. Coupling Constant Wikipedia
  23. Extension of Wheeler-Feynman Quantum Theory to the Relativistic Domain II. Emission Process PCW Davies Institute of Theoretical Astronomy University of Cambridge 1971.
  24. The Quantum Vacuum and the Cosmological Constant Problem S.E. Rugh and H. Zinkernagel Institute de Filosofia CSIC Pinar 25 Madrid
  25. The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Nonlocality John G Cramer Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA
  26. Generalized absorber theory and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox John G Cramer Dept of Physics Univ. of Washington 1980
  27. An Overview of the Transactional Interpretation John G Cramer Univ of Wash Seattle WA 1988
  28. The Possibilist Transactional Interpretation and Relativity Ruth E Kastner Foundations of Physics Group UMCP Jun 22, 2012
  29. On Real and Virtual Photons in the Davies Theory of Time-Symmetric Quantum Electrodynamics R.E. Kastner Univ. of Maryland, College Park Dec 12, 2013
  30. Electromagnetic Wave Propagation-Linear Wire Infinitesimal Antennas, Prof. Darwish Abdel Aziz, May 2015.
  31. Particle Data Group Patrignani et al Chin Phys. C, 40, 100001 (2016).
  32. To what accuracy do we know the value of the cosmological constant? Physics stack exchange.
  33. Cosmological Constant, Wikipedia


1 thought on “Instantaneous Quantum Entanglement, Vacuum Processes, and Calculation of Cosmological Constant”

  1. Amazingly succinct article, I think. It reminds me about all the mathematics I took in college and thought I’d never see again. Now, if I could only interpret what I see. Perhaps a bit more studying…

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

While reasonable effort has been expended on double-checking facts, your authors and everyone associated with this website make no claims as to accuracy. We also try to avoid trademark or copyright infringements. If you feel something should be removed, please email