# McGucken Spacetime Sculptures: The Nonlocal McGucken Sphere & Light Cones Sculpture: The Past, Present & Future created by the Fourth Expanding Dimension: dx4/dt=ic.

Dr. Elliot McGucken’s sculptures represent the foundations of Light, Time, Dimension Theory, wherein the fourth dimension is expanding at the rate of *c*, as given by *dx4/dt=ic, *thusly giving rise to all of relativity alongside quantum nonlocality, entanglement, and probability.

The McGucken Nonlocality Principle: All quantum nonlocality begins in locality.

**RELATIVITY’S LIGHT CONE IS NONLOCAL: FINDING QUANTUM MECHANICS IN THE LIGHT CONE**

McGucken’s Law of Nonlocality: All nonlocality begins as locality.

In order for two particles to become entangled, they must first share a common locality. As they separate, they may yet share the original locality, and we see them to be entangled. Thus, over time, locality is something which expands into nonlocality. What mechanism might provide this nonlocality? The expansion of the fourth dimension at the rate of c, as given by Einstein’s/Minkowski’s *x4=ict* or *dx4/dt=ic*. And so it is that locality becomes nonlocality at a rate less than or equal to the velocity of light c.

The McGucken Conjecture: ALL LIGHT CONES ARE NONLOCAL

RELATIVITY’S LIGHT CONE IS NONLOCAL: FINDING QUANTUM MECHANICS IN THE LIGHT CONE

It is quite remarkable that quantum mechanics can be seen in Einstein’s/Minkowski’s light cone in the figure below. Here’s how:

Consider two photons A and B in the below figure representing McGucken’s Light Cone.

As time passes on our watch, the photons propagate through space. No matter how far they travel, they will have not moved through x4. And thus x4 must be moving and expanding. As the photons remain stationary in x4, we may expect them to share a common locality and thus remain entangled no matter how far they travel. And too, one can see the origins of quantum mechanical probabilities in McGuckne’s Light Cone figure. As the expansion of x4 is perfectly symmetric, a photon has an equal chance of being found anywhere upon the expanding surface, which is exactly how photons behave. Quantum nonlocality walks hand-in-hand with quantum probability, and we finally see why. And too, as is even more apparent quantum nonlocality walks hand-in-hand with quantum entanglement. Simply put, quantum entanglement, nonlocality, and probability are all seen to derive from the exact same foundational physical reality of the fourth expanding dimension. And thus quantum mechanics, like relativity, arises from LTD’s simple principles of a fourth expanding dimension.

And please note how AMAZING this is. For, my friend, we have just seen all of quantum mechanics in the light cone which Minkowski and Einstein introduced to better explain relativity, even as Einstein yet rejected the nonlocality, entanglement, and probabilities found in quantum mechanics. And yet, there it all was, right before his eyes.

The light cone represents the expanding nonlocality of x4, wherein every point of x4 becomes an expanding wavefront, exactly as Christian Huygens first noted in Huygens’ Principle in the 1600s.

The Huygens-Fresnel Principle: Every point on a wavefront is a source of wavelets. These wavelets spread out in the forward direction, at the same speed as the source wave. The new wavefront is a line tangent to all of the wavelets.

When Huygens first stated thusly, he was considering the light of a candle in conjunction with the behavior of waves passing barriers on the ocean. It would be about three hundred more years before relativity showed that photons remain stationary in the fourth dimension, and yet another hundred years until Dr. E recognized this reality and exalted it in the form of a principle of the fourth expanding dimension. And thus, when Huygens was observing the character and behavior of the light emanating from his candle, he was observing the expansion of the fourth dimension! Little did he know that he was drawing the expansion of the fourth dimension in his sketch of a candle in the below figures:

Locality becomes nonlocality via the expansion of the fourth dimension at the rate of c as given by dx4/dt=ic, which naturally gives rise to Huygens’ Principle, time and all its arrows, all of relativity via the spacetime metric x4=ict, and quantum nonlocality, etanglement, and probability.

The McGucken Principle of a fourth expanding dimension given by dx4/dt=ic predicts that all nonlocality begins as locality.

In the grand endeavor of physics, a physicist observes nature and then composes principles, postulates, and equations reflecting physical reality. Other physicists are invited to disprove the principles, postulates, and equations via mathematics and thought experiments, and/or conduct experiments and make observations that demonstrate the said principles, postulates, and equations to be false.

The McGucken Principle: Quantum nonlocality begins in locality.

The world’s top scientists (and philosophers/quantum computing mavericks) have yet to share how they would go about entangling two unentangled electrons in NY and LA. Please, if they (or anyone) could tell me how they would entangle the two distant electrons, without bringing them in direct, local contact, or by using a system or systems of particles that originated in a local manner with local contact, then I would consider myself defeated in my argument, and I would retract my principle: “ALL QUANTUM NONLOCALITY BEGINS IN LOCALITY.” This provides a direct physical test of the expansion of the fourth dimension given by dx4/dt=ic.

But, if they are unable to explain how they would go about entangling the two electrons in NY and LA without using some form of nonlocality which begins in locality, then SCIENCE and PHILOSOPHY must declare

The McGucken Principle of Nonlocality the victor here.

The McGucken Principle: Quantum nonlocality begins in locality.

If the world’s top quantum physicists are unable to demonstrate that the above principle is wrong in a laboratory, or even in a thought experiment, then, until they falsify it, the principle shall reign. And I will look forward to presenting it at Harvard, Stanford, Yale, the Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies, and the John Bell Institute. Bell, Bohr, and Einstein certainly valued experimental truths, principle, and reality over dogma.

And too, if any of the world’s top physicists came to realize that the McGucken Principle is true, I would certainly love it they joined my in writing papers on it. Contained in the principle is a cornucopia of physical entities and opportunities, including time and all its arrows and asymmetries, Huygens’ Principle, relativity, the very heart of quantum mechanics, and the second law of thermodynamics.

Again, here is the fuller description of the laboratory experiment involving two unentangled electrons in NY and LA:

Consider an electron in a lab in New York electron A and a second electron in a lab in Los Angeles electron B. Both the NY and LA electron’s position, spin, and momentum are being continuously measured, and the NY and LA experimentalists talk on the phone and determine that there is no correlation between the measurements on the electrons. They thus conclude that the electrons A and B are NOT entangled.

If they wish to entangle the NY and LA electrons, they must bring them into direct, local contact, or use some transitive third-party entity or system to entangle the two, whence this third-party element or system must have shared a locality with both particles and with itself, as all nonlocality begins as locality. One possible manifestation of the third-party entity could be electron C and electron D, whence sometime in our lab frame’s past, electron C and electron D were brought into direct, local contact thusly becoming entangled, before being separated with electron C being transported to NY and and electron D being transported to LA, fully maintaining their entanglement.

Then, electron C is allowed to interact with electron A in NY, and electron D is allowed to interact with electron B in LA at the same time. Then, electron A and electron B may become immediately entangled in a nonlocal manner exceeding the velocity of light. But, neverthless, the nonlocality originated in the local contact between electron C and electron D. And thus the principle stands: all nonlocality begins in locality.

I thus stand by the second McGucken principle too:

Only systems of particles with intersecting light spheres, with each light sphere centered about each respective particle, can ever be entangled.

While the nonlocal influences found in entanglement are instantaneous, the property of entanglement between particles is limited by the velocity of light, as all nonlocality begins as locality.

If you would like to refute the fact that all nonlocality begins as locality, please do share how you would entangle the two electrons in NY and LA in a way that is faster than the velocity of light and in a manner which does not involve any instance of nonlocality derived from locality. I hope that you might consider becoming a coauthor!

I am preparing thorough papers on it all. The simple principle has numerous ramifications spanning time’s arrows, relativity, the second law of thermodynamics, and more. If you would like to perhaps be a coauthor, I would be happy to send you a free t-shirt: https://teespring.com/the-chloe-principles-of-physic

As nonlocality grows over time, we can also link nonlocality to time’s arrows and asymmetries. And too, nonlocality may be directly linked to Huygens’ Principle which stipulates that every local point becomes a nonlocal wave. For anyone left refuting the principle that “All nonlocality begins in locality,” please do let us know how you would entangletwo unentangled electrons in NY and LA without bringing them in direct local contact, or without using some third-party system that originated locally and which only afterwards came in direct, local contact with the two electrons in LA and NY. More specifically: Dr. McGucken’s two laws of nonlocality:

1. All nonlocality begins as locality.

2. Nonlocality grows over time, in a manner limited by the velocity of light c.

# While the past light-cone is generally local, the future light cone is generally non-local.

## Dr. Elliot McGucken Theoretical Physics

## Dec 15, 2020·3 min read

Consider the above light cone illustrated in Einstein’s THE MEANING OF RELATIVITY.

Consider the standard light cone depicted at Wikipedia, which Einstein’s light cone inspired and informed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone#/media/File:World_line.svg

Light cone in 2D space plus a time dimension.: CC BY-SA 3.0 SVG version: K. Aainsqatsi at en.wikipedia Original PNG version: Stib at en.wikipedia — Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. (Original text: *self-made*)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone#/media/File:World_line.svg

Let us show that while the past light-cone is generally local, the future light cone is generally non-local.

First, let us consider the future light cone:

Consider a pair of entangled photons A and B which travel in opposite directions from the origin in the x1, x2 plane.

No matter how far apart they travel, they will remain entangled, meaning that their two positions will define a nonlocality.

Now consider numerous entangled pairs of photons, wherein the two photons in each pair travel away from the origin in opposite directions.

Together, the positions of the photons in all the entangled pairs of photons will by and by define a circle of nonlocality as the number of pairs of photons approaches infinity.

Now consider a third axis which is time. Together, the positions of the photons in all the entangled pairs of photons will define a conical surface of nonlocality.

Ergo, the surface of a light cone is a nonlocality.

The surface of a future light cone is thus nonlocal.

QED

Now let us consider the past light cone. Consider events which appear at the bottom circular edge of the past light cone. These events are spatially separated, and thus, generally speaking, they will not be entangled. So it is that the past light cone is generally local, as nonlocal entanglement is not generally observed.

So it is that we have shown: While the past light-cone is generally local, the future light cone is generally non-local.

WRITTEN BY