Scerir: Thanks for your thoughtful reply. > Today is commonly accepted that the QM domain is incompatible with > that "local" "realism". That is because Bell inequalities actually > are violated. Local hidden variables do not exist.

## Advertising

I know this is not a popular view, but I am not convinced of the validity of such experiments. One proponent of the realist opinion, who has better arguments than I, is Caroline Thompson: http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/ > But, fortunately, Bell inequalities imply a Kolmogorovian > probability model. So we can keep that "local" "realism" and say that > probability is truly non-Kolmogorovian. > > But, wait. Ehe. There is another problem. The Bohm-Aharonov effect > is truly "non-local". And that is hard, very hard to avoid. I admit I'm not too familiar with these concepts or terms. I'll try to understand them a little better. In the mean time, my main objection to non-local phenomena is, once again, our inability to formally implement it. Challenge: write a set of non-local equations or a non-local computer program that isn't implemented locally. For example: It would be easy enough to program a virtual reality simulation to exhibit seemingly non-local behaviors. We could even do something extremely macroscopic like joining the motion of two pool balls firmly together - so that whenever one was moved, the other moved also - seemingly instantaneously. >From all indications, to the inhabitants of our virtual reality, their world is non-local. But they should know better. They must realize that even though they may see non-local phenomena happening around them, they could always be fooled by SOME local communication happening behind the scenes. And so... our virtual reality simulation, being run on a conventional computer, literally has HIDDEN VARIABLES that the inhabitants don't see, but we can. It seems a popular fallacy to say that Bell "proved" that no local theory can account for the experiments. But this is not true at all. From what I can tell, Bell only showed that Quantum Mechanics, as it is formulated, is non-local. But this is a far cry from showing it in the "real world". If we're intent on looking for magic, we needn't go so far as quantum mechanics. For that matter, we could say that Newton "proved" that gravity is a non-local phenomenon. And, to some extent, we would be correct. Experiments show that gravity travels instantaneously from the Earth to the Sun... and all the bodies of the cosmos simultaneously. But we know better... We know that SOMETHING must carry the information from one place to another - even if it appears to be happening instantaneously *from our point of view*. Joel