Are there any theories as to how an electron is able to communicate its state to another entangled electron over an...

The fact remains that one entangled particle is somehow communicating with the other instantly over distance. We just don't know how and there are no real theories as to how.

No one knows.
If you're looking for suggestions though...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie–Bohm_theory
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation

Bohm's pilot-wave theory fell into disfavor, relative to the Copenhagen interpretation, because it was explicitly non-local. That was considered "weird". It's been looked at again because Bell's theorem showed the universe _is_ non-local.
The Transactional interpretation side-steps the "information is being transferred faster-than-light" problem by postulating waves which go _backwards_ in time.
Both, SFAIK, match all current experimental evidence. Neither requires abandoning Causality.

Otherwise, as noted, "Shut up and calculate"

That merely evades the question and the analogy isn't even a good one.
Move one end of a board and the other end doesn't move for _at least_ a billionth of a second for each foot of length.

correct me if i'm wrong but as i heard it, all existing electrons are always at the same position in their orbit around the nucleus when observed

That's not true, though.

>are there any theories as to how an electron is able to communicate its state to another entangled electron over an infinite distance of space?
Well, gosh, no one has ever thought to ask that before.

this is Veeky Forums dude, no ones positing mind-blowing new questions

"Everything is proto-conscious."

There is the ER=EPR hypothesis, but I think it best to say we don't know much about spacetime from a quantum mechanical perspective.

The classical notion of distance may be irrelevant to some form of "quantum" spacetime geometry.

And, if I'm not mistaken, the idea behind ER=EPR is to explain spacetime as coming from entanglement (or quantum correlations or information in general), and not the other way around. Of course, at the level of speculation, it doesn't matter much which comes first, but the progress in these areas tend to favour quantum mechanics over spacetime.

There are different levels of the conjecture, I think the most speculative form being wormholes and entangled pairs are essentially equivalent. i.e. Every pair of entangled states are "connected" via wormhole and every wormhole corresponds to a pair of entangled states

>implying they communicate.

If I wright the same letter twice and seal them in envelopes and mail bolt to opposite sides of the earth with instructions to open them at the same time did the two letters communicate there content to each other faster than the speed of light?

What if I had a stack of paired letters and I grabbed a set at random without knowing what was inside a particular set until opening it. I mail one with instructions when to open it, we open ours at the same time... is this FTL communication?

>If I wright the same letter twice and seal them in envelopes and mail bolt to opposite sides of the earth with instructions to open them at the same time did the two letters communicate there content to each other faster than the speed of light?

that's different than what's happening though. There have been experiments done that have proven that the properties of a particle aren't decided at time of separation of two entangled particles.

Many worlds interpretation: collapse is just what the observer sees, it's not an absolute effect.

The oscillation moves through the wood at the speed of sound, not instantaneously. If the plank of wood is long enough ,there will be a huge difference between the the initial push and the other end of the plank actually moving.

The quantum state of each particle is not defined until one is observed. They are not written until looked at. Before then, they are a fuzzy state of being both up and down.

Quantum state is described by wave function exactly, it's well defined.

Yes but not instantly, the speed of the information that you pushed the planck at one end and that the other need to move is still limited to the speed of light

The specific state of a quantum particle isn't defined until it is observed. The uncertainty principle, Schrödinger's cat, and superposition principle, assure this. Are you getting hung up on the use of the word "defined"?

Consider yourself corrected.
The "atom as a miniature solar system with electrons orbiting a central nucleus" paradigm was junked nearly a century ago.
Until "observed" electrons don't _have_ positions, merely most probable locations.
They can't even be considered to be "orbiting"
Chemistry texts illustrate this with weird blobby shapes.

magnets

The specific state of a quantum particle is defined and is described by wave function to the last digit precisely, it definitely doesn't exist in state given by measurement, it simply doesn't.