These weird QM effects only show up in small systems that aren't
affected by the 2nd law of thermodynamics.  In such systems,  the laws
of physics are time symmetric.  Given that,  it seems to me that QM
weirdness is trivially explained by the lack of our usual conception of
cause and effect.  Neither the initial state nor the end state look
special from the perspective of an arrow to time.  Isn't "non-locality"
simply associated with the ability for the "future" to affect the
"past"?

IMO entanglement/non-locality etc should be regarded as merely a symptom
of advanced waves which only make their weird effects apparent in small
systems.

Does any other theory besides transactional QM explain inertia as
arising from the rest of the universe?

- David




-----Original Message-----
From: scerir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2003 6:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: "spooky action at a distance"

Norman Samish:

> This is unsatisfying.

Yes. It is also called the "conspiracy" 
between QM and SR.  

> I would like to hear speculations on non-locality.

There are many in QM. I mean many non-localities.
In example the famous 'collapse', the 'Aharonov-Bohm' effect
(also with neutral particles), the EPR non-separability, and
there are non-localities involving time (interferences in time,
quantum beats, Franson interferometers, etc.), and also
effects, like the 'delayed choice', possibly related to 
the 'block universe', or 'holism', or 'wholeness', or 
time-like non separability. 

And there are also 'delocalizations'(non just superpositions) 
in the 'weak measurement' approach (measurements which give 
little information). 

And there are - how can I say? - topological (?) non-localities 
too. Imagine a two-slit apparatus. You can also think this
two-slit apparatus as a 'superposizion' of two *physical* 
complementary *pieces*. Not just hole 1 + hole 2. But something 
like

matter            void
void       +     matter     
matter            void

of course with the right measures and shapes! Now imagine
to locate one piece in a location and the other piece in 
another location. You get a sort of 'non-local' two-slit 
apparatus. Now if a photon beam goes through one of those 
pieces above and a correlated photon beam goes through the 
other piece you get an interference effect, due to the
'non-local' two-slit apparatus.

Of course all the above are not 'speculations' about
non-locality but performed experiments, showing
several faces of non-locality.

For useful speculations you can also read the Bohrian
and instrumentalist Asher Peres (no physical collapse)

and the 'philosopher' Suarez (a-temporal quantum)

 

 




Reply via email to