The double slit experiment and a solution to the Fermi Paradox

 The double slit experiment and the quantum erasor experiments destroy my worldview.  I thought I would never have my mind blown better than at an MIT batchelor party, but I was wrong.  When I found out that quantum entanglement had been proven, repeatebly, and now even for macroscopic items, many houses of cards collapsed.  It doesn't change the math, but it changes the assumptions, and so it will possibly affect future exploration, but what it should do is echo back in time and eradicate some of the dead ends we travelled because of the incorrect theories.

Theories being wrong over time don't negate the fact they served their purpose.  See, proving the theory wrong IS sort of the point, for a lot of scientists.  That is the beauty of the science construct, it lets peope who are creative and smart make things, and then people who are not creative but THOROUGH pick the idea to pieces.  The evolution of ideas through this process is robust.   My ex father in law was this kind of scientist.  Robust.  He would not butter a slice of bread without drawing up the plan and having it reviewed, but that is who one wants building the reactors, yeah?

But sometimes theories that could be accepted are discarded, not because they are wrong, but simply because another theory also fits and is less wierd.  This is the case of the Steady State Universe; it fit the math and it fit the experimental results BUT it had something too wierd for the day.  So they picked the Big Bang Theory.  It had some unpallatable assumptions, and a clear boundary past which we basically kicked the can of causality, and the expansion of the universe required adding dark matter to explain it; that is as distasteful to some scientists as adding more dimensions just to get the m-theory math to work right.  But it did not have quantum entanglement.  It did not have non-locality.  It did not have what Einstein called, 'spooky action at a distance'.  I used to think he was talking about just gravity, but he didn't like the idea of fields of ether either.  He liked to see the propagation of things, and to measure the propagation of things, you assume they are going in a direction, since time is flowing in one direction.  But time might just be a construct, and the math never needed the expansion to be caused by dark matter if it didn't start with a bang.  But that required spooky action at a distance, and so we now love the theme song to the Big Bang Theory, but that theory is wrong.

Because non-locality has beeb repeatedly proven in the EPR experiment (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen) which was only a thought experiment until we smartest monkeys and brilliant tools of the mushroom built fine enough tools to test it in real life.  Or as close to real as we can imagine.

That means the universe is more likely to be a steady state machine, like a display, that has pixels that can change state to reflect informaiton, like whether a galaxy is present.

It makes me wonder how big the Planck constant is in some of those fancy new Universes with the state of the art graphics...

But let me digress before I forget to solve the Fermi Paradox.  I think it is obvious that a firm self selcting group of people need to form a society that refuses to accept dishonesty is necessary to cross the skies to other galaxies or other stars.  Sailors pray on land maybe but at sea there is only time to keep the ship afloat.  Science is repeatable and when you can't get back to shore for generations, yu can't stray from what works.  If a society starts to rely on things that were invented to provide hope or comfort, it will waste time that could be spent dealing with actual issues.  This is not to say that hope and comfort do not have their places, but they are balms.  They are stronger than nyquil, and so one should not make decisions or use large machinery, like generation starships, while using religion.