2009/2/15 Gregg Reynolds
The metaphor is action-at-a-distance. Quantum entanglement is a vivid way of conveying it since it is so strange, but true. Obviously one is not expected to understand quantum entanglement, only the idea of two things linked "invisibly" across a boundary.
This is unrelated to haskell, but it's so common a misconception that I have to debunk it. What actually happens, if you run through the math, is that when you entangle two particles it affects the entangled property such that, when you later start spreading information about the entangled state - the universe is effectively divided in whatever the possible results are, MWI style, but once the information contacts the related entangled information from the other particle, inconsistent results cancel out and you get a big fat zero for a wavefunction. Consistent results reinforce, so it's still unitary as a whole. See, it all adds up to normality. Pay no attention to the bazillion timelines being continually destroyed behind the scenes, please; anyhow, you can never actually *observe* inconsistency, so if your notion of "self" is flexible enough you can just claim you continue along the consistent timeline.