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)
