This is 3P, EEG, where two electrons are "as if" entangled via a third \(g^{+}\) particle,
this is looking less like entanglement. Post "Emmy Noether" dated 07 Jul 2015 suggests that entanglement can be on a general scale but weakly so, where \(\alpha\) is small. Weak entanglement results in the light speed limit. There can be local entanglement where two, three or more particles are strongly entangled; \(\alpha\) is large.
These suggests that strongly entangled particles are slow (less than light speed) particles. Light speed is then not an universal limit but an universal upper limit. Strongly entangled particle experiences a greater loss of energy to particles it is entangled with and reaches an early terminal velocity.
If all strongly entangled particles are accelerated, they will all reach light speed.
The only relevance for entanglement here is that all time dimensions of the entangle particles align. This can be falsehood in the first place. It may be necessary that energies along \(t_T\) are oscillating in phase for entanglement. This need to be in phase would account for the spread in \(\alpha\), the fraction of energy shared between entangled particles. Strongly entangled particles are particles in phase and so have a high \(\alpha\).
If alignment in the time dimensions and being in phase are the only criteria for entanglement, then any two particle of the same type can be entangled. In the above case, it is not necessary to have the third positive gravity particle, \(g^{+}\) for the two electrons to be entangled.
What happened to one spin up the other spin down?...Opposite spins results from conservation of angular momentum when the particles are created/emitted. This enables the spin of one particle to be determined without measuring it directly. Measuring the other particle, and so destroying its spin, indicates the spin of the particle without destroying this particle's spin. This is not entanglement, where the change in one spin effects a simultaneous change in the entangled pair's spin.
