Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, engage me on the substance. He gave you constructive criticism about the form, specifically the ways in which your form makes it overly difficult to engage with you. > I'm saying you don't need to classically move things in order to teleport information. Generally for QM entanglement experiments you can't interpret the result without the measurements from both sides. So while you might be able to demonstrate af…
The point is whether we can use quantum error correction to bias the probabilities on one end, before the decoherence happens. Modern quantum error correction techniques are dramatically improving: Decoherence suppression: Extending coherence times of qubits. Fault-tolerant quantum computing: Reducing errors in quantum state evolution. Quantum memory storage: Holding quantum states stable for long durations. So if de…
> bias the probabilities on one end, before the decoherence happens
Let's start there. What do you mean by that? What would this look like in concrete terms if I went and did it on the bench?
My understanding is that any measurement you take will appear random and uncorrelated until you have the data from the other side. At which point you can say "oh hey look, turns out it was actually correlated" but you can't demonstrate that fact until you have both sets of data in hand.
So in simple, concise, and concrete terms, what violation of the above are you proposing?