Quite; the larger the object the shorter its wavelength. They've been probing the limits of detectable wave-particle duality and so far they've achieved
double-slit duality in molecules of up to 800 atoms (5000 protons, 5000 neutrons and 5000 electrons). That's quite impressive.
Interesting. I could see even distant stars being affected by the quantum level possibly, but what I have a hard time seeing, is life itself being affected. I suspect that the reason for the effects and probabilities and such, is to accommodate life...especially created life with choice.
The calculations tell you what will happen (probabilistically); the interpretations are attempts to understand what the calculations mean in the world. Much as the inverse-square law tells you how gravity reduces with distance and General Relativity interprets this in terms of a distortion of the spacetime metric.
OK, but the problem with that is that their attempts are all based on a narrow range of criteria.
If we imagine entanglement at a great interstellar distance, then we do not need any time to have photons near earth to be changed and respond!
"John Bell posited that such changes can occur instantaneously, even if the particles are very far apart.
..Last year, however, three different research groups were able to perform substantive tests of Bell's Theorem, and all of them found support for the basic idea...
..."Our paper and the other two published last year show that Bell was right: any model of the world that contains hidden variables must also allow for entangled particles to influence one another at a distance,"
http://www.space.com/31933-quantum-entanglement-action-at-a-distance.html
There's no way to know anything for sure, but if your model consistently makes correct predictions of what you can observe, it's a useful model.
We don't really observe the far away universe, we observe light here from there!
We take the universe as we find it - if GR predicts the bending of light around massive objects (the sun, gravitational lensing of remote galaxies, etc) and we see those effects in the universe, we provisionally accept it as a good model.
Good enough as long as the asics of space and time we know are in place. In the far universe we don't know that they are. The question arises, what else may bend light, and how far away is that star around which it is being bent, and how big, and whether the usual forces and laws we know would exist exactly in the same degree as here or not..etc etc. If gravity were more or less, then bending would also be more or less...etc. We can't sit on earth, and impose our fishbowl realities on the universe in a doctrinal, fanatical, and rigid way.
If the absorption lines in the spectra of stars matches the absorption lines of elements in the lab, we take that as an indication that they contain the same elements. The more independent lines of evidence we have that the distant universe behaves as our model predicts, the greater the confidence we can have in our model as a good representation.
Having some of the same elements way out there doesn't really tell us a whole lot unless that is all there is, and there are not also things we cannot see. Or..if we don't know the time and space there...etc.
It's creation that's the assumption.
All the miracles of the bible guarantee creation is real. It is not an assumption, but a matter of very sacredly preserved record.
The early astronomers & cosmologists assumed a geocentric universe within a fixed shell of point-like stars. It was their detailed observations of the universe that eventually convinced them that it couldn't be a correct model. Assumptions have repeatedly been falsified by observations, leading to new or more refined models.
They also used to associate spirits with sectors of the heaven, or stars. Also, the observations were all in this nature and time. What things were like before if the nature was different could not be known for a time lapse photo in this state.
Lol! fortunately, your lack of belief has no effect on it. It can't be proved, but multiple independent lines of evidence show it behaves exactly as one would expect if that was the case - and a galaxy of stars follows suit.
The distances to stars depend on space and time existing all the way there from here exactly the same. That is not known. There is only what we see in the space and time now on earth that we work with.
You realize you're saying our choice is stochastic? i.e. a random selection according to a probability distribution?
No, I don't think I am saying that. I am saying that Adam, and Jesus on earth (the second Adam) controlled nature. I am saying others in the bible, through prayer also affected nature. I suspect that creation originally (and in the future also) was set up to respond to our words and choices. Not random. The reason it may appear random to us here and now, is because the determination of what particles and whatnots will do, has to be flexible, so as to be able to respond to us!
