The formulation “where each and every particle will land” is ambiguous as it suggests that particles are following a well-defined trajectory before “landing”.
The double-slit experiment and other similar single-particle interference experiments led the founding fathers of quantum mechanics to the idea of the “collapse of the wave function”. This cryptic term means simply that one cannot assign properties or trajectories to the particles before detection. In the case of the double slit experiment the photographic plate registering the single blackenings can be considered an array of many detectors. So the idea of the collapse means that at the moment of detection there is a coordination of all these detectors establishing which of them counts and imposing to the others to remain silent.
In the 5th Solvay Conference (October 1927) Einstein opposed such an explanation arguing by means of a thought experiment that it would imply faster-than-light communication, if the detectors are placed enough far away from each other.
Astonishingly Einstein’s thought experiment was first realized in 2012 and I am proud of having proposed it (see this article). The experiment proves nonlocal coordination between detection events.
This is the fundamental quantum mechanical nonlocality. The entanglement-nonlocality discovered by John Bell is a particular case of the nonlocality at detection, which already appears in interference experiments like the double slit one.
Accordingly, in the double-slit experiment the spot in the plate where the blackening appears (“where the particle lands”) is the result of a free choice coming from outside space-time.
I have the impression we are misunderstanding each other. I would be thankful to know your References for your claims about entanglement.
I myself have been taught by John Bell himself, and even proposed and co-worked in realizing entanglement experiments.
According to my experience, in “entangled particle experiments” the correlations oscillate from 100% discordances [50 % heads-tails and 50% tails-heads] to 100% concordances [50% heads-heads and 50% tails-tails] passing through all possible intermediate distributions conforming to a sinusoidal function depending on the phase (given by the settings of the apparatus), as for instance:
80% discordances [40% heads-tails and 40% tails-heads] and
20% concordances [10% heads-heads and 10% tails-tails].
50% discordances [25% heads-tails and 25% tails-heads] and
50% concordances [25% heads-heads and 25% tails-tails].
40% discordances [20% heads-tails and 20% tails-heads] and
60% concordances [30% heads-heads and 30% tails-tails].
And so on.
The important point is that the sinusoidal dependence cannot be considered caused by Alice’s choices of the apparatus settings because the measurements are space-like separated.
Accordingly the dependence reveals plan or purpose coming from outside space-time.
Without such a plan there would be no entanglement at all and the 4 possible results would have been equally distributed for all settings.
Information without any “material or energy” carrier means immaterial information and hence refers to “pre-established harmony” (Max Born) in some invisible mind beyond space-time.