

This paper reports a “delayed choice quantum eraser” experiment proposed by Scully and Drühl in 1982. The experimental results demonstrated the possibility of simultaneously observing both particlelike and wavelike behavior of a quantum via quantum entanglement. The whichpath or bothpath information of a quantum can be erased or marked by its entangled twin even after the registration of the quantum. http://www.bottomlayer.com/bottom/kimscully/kimscullyweb.htm#fig2

Bold added by me for emphasis
So you keep this diagram in mind. We then go to looking at this other linked video.
The understanding of the word “erasure,” needs to be clarified in relation too, diagrams.


Yes, since subatomic particles are actually ‘probability distributions’ prior to being measured – all possible positions and states are part of their potential until the ‘collapse’ of the wave function. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation comment section of video

So consider this for example. Space time arises from a 5d world. Unification of quantum gravity and light, allow us to have a 4 dimensional understanding of the classical world. If you assume that a 2d screen is a 5D world, then what happens behind the screen?


Similarly, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and gravity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained in the fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.Kaku’s preface of Hyperspace, page ix para 3

Is it a materialistic view you encounter, or perhaps a point of view you establish by your choice of perceptible qualities that exist for you now?? Given there is a potential for meaning, then, one “same” meaning could not have been encountered by all, for it leaves room for probability encounters, that reveal different views of the world…..yet, some will get the probable meaning, as to what exactly I am saying.
Quantum Theory, is not a materialistic point of view.
***
The path of least resistance from a the path of probable outcomes?
What would this look like if we were to say such traveling paths through the cosmos were defined by the paths of least resistance versus a probability paths. Clumping, or interference. If you understand what I am writing then please comment. I would like my thinking to be destroyed by your reason and your science, or you can help clear up misconceptions that are forming wrongly as a Bad idea.


In nonrelativistic physics, the principle of least action – or, more accurately, the principle of stationary action – is a variational principle that, when applied to the action of a mechanical system, can be used to obtain the equations of motion for that system by stating a system follows the path where the average difference between the kinetic energy and potential energy is minimized or maximized over any time period. It is called stable if minimized. In relativity, a different average must be minimized or maximized. The principle can be used to derive Newtonian, Lagrangian, and Hamiltonian equations of motion. It was historically called “least” because its solution requires finding the path that has the least change from nearby paths.[1] Its classical mechanics and electromagnetic expressions are a consequence of quantum mechanics, but the stationary action method helped in the development of quantum mechanics.– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_action

***
Maybe I should insert here how we might look at gravitational lensing and gravitation field influences as to how that lensing can distort or divert the photon’s path…….just another way to look at the way gravitational influences affect the photon’s path…..to see that the least resistance could as a affect not deviate speed of light in one of those tunnels as a way in which to determine satellite travel? Should there be a correction here?
My assumptions are generalizations, so I needed to look further to understand this relationship in regards to abstractions and how one can see in different ways. I wanted to see as far as I could in correspondence with the physics, to understand what quantum theory may mean if and when united with gravity as to a correspondence to dimensional references.


Today, however, we do have the opportunity not only to observe phenomena in four and higher dimensions, but we can also interact with them. The medium for such interaction is computer graphics. Computer graphic devices produce images on twodimensional screens. Each point on the screen has two real numbers as coordinates, and the computer stores the locations of points and lists of pairs of points which are to be connected by line segments or more complicated curves. In this way a diagram of great complexity can be developed on the screen and saved for later viewing or further manipulation From Flatland to Hypergraphics: Interacting with Higher Dimensions http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~banchoff/ISR/ISR.html

The simulation argument for me needed to be understood better as well, so the 2d screen needed for me to be further explained as pixels are used to highlight the depth of our abstractions. Banchoff demonstrations in terms of the geometry as an abstraction in geometry for instance. Topology.


Similarly, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and gravity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained in the fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.Kaku’s preface of Hyperspace, page ix para 3

There is then this being incompatible with each other( gravity and Quantum Theory) that has been talked about that Einstein was after in explaining things in terms of materialism, and to find, that Quantum theory is not a materialist explanation. So I find Einsteins attempts and recognition in later life as a step toward the need for such unification.
As an example, your screen you are working on is a 2d example of a 5d reality. Can we indeed create mathematical reality of higher abstractions? What does that mean anyway? Thomas Banchoff demonstrates geometrical imaging on 2d screens?


Where would these other universes be in relation to ours? Is there a way to envision it? Well, we live in three spatial dimensions: We move back and forth, up and down, left to right. And then there’s time, so that’s our fourdimensional universe. Another universe might be essentially right next to ours by going in another direction that’s not one of those four. We might call it “another kind of sideways.” See: Riddles of the Multiverse http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/johnsonmultiverse.html

This screen has no depth other then the representations that we see are on this screen. You can call them pixels. What does a 5d world mean? In essence this is not about materialism anymore but a grasp for uniting space time with quantum theory? The 2d screen is derived from a 5d reality.
The understanding then sought for is that gravity and light are connected in a 5d world. Is a photon affected as it travels through a gravity field? What did Einstein mean as to a slide of light?


“Yet I exist in the hope that these memoirs, in some manner, I know not how, may find their way to the minds of humanity in Some Dimensionality, and may stir up a race of rebels who shall refuse to be confined to limited Dimensionality.” from Flatland, by E. A. Abbott
