Soumendra Nath Thakur
July 30, 2025
Entangled subatomic particles may be more accurately understood not as entities physically connected across space, but as offspring of a common energetic source—each inheriting observable characteristics through initial energetic constraints imposed at Δt = 0, the moment of joint origin. Whether in atomic, subatomic, or nuclear contexts, their correlated behaviours reflect ancestrally encoded features rather than real-time interaction.
For instance, a liberated photon inherits its frequency f, directionality, and polarization directly from the electron undergoing a quantum transition. In turn, free electrons carry forward their internal kinetic configuration and apparent mass Mᵃᵖᵖ, shaped by their prior bound state within a parent atom. Similarly, in nuclear processes, α (alpha), β (beta), and γ (gamma) emissions inherit their physical traits—such as effective phase states, wave energy, and directionality—from their respective parent nuclei.
This framework, within Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM), offers a causal and quantifiable explanation for why emitted or separated particles exhibit twin-like or entangled behaviour. According to ECM, the kinetic energy KEᴇᴄᴍ of such particles is defined as (see: Appendix 31: Frequency and Energy in ECM):
KEᴇᴄᴍ = ½Mᵉᶠᶠv²
where v is the particle’s velocity, and Mᵉᶠᶠ is the effective mass inclusive of inherited structural symmetry.
• For massive particles (e.g., electrons, α/β particles), v < c
• For massless or radiative particles (e.g., photons, γ-rays), v = c, and energy is entirely frequency-driven
This foundational relation is further enhanced in ECM to reflect the frequency-origin of kinetic energy, incorporating dual mass displacement mechanisms (Appendix 31, Appendix 35):
KEᴇᴄᴍ = (ΔMᴍ⁽ᵈᴮ⁾ + ΔMᴍ⁽ᴾ⁾)c² = hf
Where:
• ΔMᴍ⁽ᵈᴮ⁾ = hf𝑑ʙ/c², mass displacement due to inherited de Broglie frequency
• ΔMᴍ⁽ᴾ⁾ = hfᴘ/c², mass displacement due to Planck-frequency-induced energy
• Total inherited frequency: f = f𝑑ʙ + fᴘ
This shows that the kinetic behaviour of a liberated or entangled particle arises from a superposition of wave-mechanical and quantum-emission frequencies inherited from its parent system. The observed energy is not the result of post-separation interaction, but a direct outcome of ancestral encoding.
In ECM, frequency f is not just a measurable trait—it is a core inherited identity. The corresponding effective gravitational acceleration gᵉᶠᶠ, representing the particle’s energetic-gravitational coupling and internal symmetry state, also evolves continuously from its origin at Δt = 0, unless perturbed. Thus, identical or complementary values of gᵉᶠᶠ, Mᵃᵖᵖ, or oscillator phase shift x° between particle pairs indicate not ongoing physical linkage, but co-originated symmetry.
From this perspective, particles once bound in a shared parent system retain synchronized traits because their wave structures, phase origins, and energetic embeddings were simultaneously defined under the same initial boundary conditions. In ECM terms, persistence of identical gᵉᶠᶠ trajectories or conserved energy per phase Eₜₒₜₐₗ/ϕ expresses structural coherence, not instantaneous communication.
Conclusion:
Entanglement Is Not Physical Connection Across Space, But Ancestral Encoding Across Time
Popular interpretations often suggest that entangled particles remain “physically connected regardless of distance.” However, such claims imply a nonlocal spatial mechanism that lacks both theoretical grounding and empirical necessity.
In ECM, these interpretations are replaced with a more causally consistent alternative: entanglement arises from the ancestral encoding of frequency, energy, and phase symmetry at the moment of common origin (Δt = 0). The correlations observed in Bell-type experiments emerge from embedded identity parameters—such as gᵉᶠᶠ, Mᵃᵖᵖ, and x°—inherited from their mutual parent system.
Thus, entangled particles “share the same fate” not through present-time physical linkage, but because their energetic identities were synchronously encoded. This preserves both realism and causality, offering a coherent ECM-based explanation of quantum correlation—without invoking paradoxes of spacelike nonlocality.
—Soumendra Nath Thakur (ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803)
Tagore’s Electronic Lab, India
See related appendices: Appendix 31, Appendix 35, and Appendix 29 (on redshift-phase-frequency relationships)
#Entanglement #QuantumFoundations #ExtendedClassicalMechanics #Causality #PhaseSymmetry #deBroglie #QuantumInterpretation #ECM
