Basically, what skybrian has, in a rather short way, said. As far as I have been able to find out over the years, quantum entanglement "does" operate at speeds greatly exceeding that of the speed of light, but, because of the weird properties of quantum mechanics, no "operation" that could ever be used to transfer data between two sets of particles is possible.
So while they "are" entangled, they are apparently not entangled enough in a stable way such that a change to atom A would be picked up as a new change to atom B (thus, having successfully transferred some sort of information), because the quantum state breaks down somehow.
While the article you reference is quite good, if I do say so, as it points out many aspects of how people 'exude' superiority more than they actually are 'superior', or 'more talented' than others, straight up saying that "Talent is a myth" is none-sense. Your view should be more nuanced.
I'm not going to go through and analyze the undoubtedly dense original research, but if the click-baitey headline is correct, this does seem like a huge jump in our grasp on reality.
From how long have we thought that quantum particle's "leaps" were random, and part of the inherent unpredictability of quantum reality? How long has popular culture around "quantum randomness" been ingrained in our inner imaginations of how the world worked?
How can something like this even conceptually make sense? I'm sorry, but can someone explain to me how a neural network could approximate physically-deduced laws of nature (as had-coded into the classical simulator as I imagine) "without any distinguishable error"?
This is the biggest bs I have ever heard, since an molecular physics simulator that is beat by a neural network can only just be unoptimized as hell.
dalbasal, I feel like you're quietly sitting on a fascinating analysis of a facet of the modern economy. Mind sharing the sources of your knowledge so I can learn about it myself, either in the form of books, or articles?
