By small I meant "small number of particles".

- David


-----Original Message-----
From: scerir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2003 6:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: "spooky action at a distance"

David Barrett-Lennard

> According to QM, in small systems evolving according to the
Hamiltonian,
> time certainly exists but there is no arrow of time within the scope
of
> the experiment.  In such small systems we can run the movie backwards
> and everything looks normal.

Yes, but how small? Because now they perform experiments
over large distance. Not just the 45 meters of the old
Jasin interferometer. But 10 km. or even 100 km. And
still they find interferences. (Of course those
beams are correlated and well protected!).

In general the argument 'contra' the transactional
interpretation is this one below (in this case, by
Anton Zeilinger). But I do not know well enough Cramer's
interpretation. So I cannot judge.

<In the Transactional Interpretation the state vector is 
considered to be a real physical wave emitted as an 
"offer wave" based on the preparation procedure of the 
experiment. The interaction then comes to a close 
through the emission of the "confirmation wave" by 
what is usually called the collapse of the wave function. 
The quantum particle, e.g. the photon, electron etc., 
is then considered to be identical with the finished 
transaction. It is fundamental to that interpretation 
that where the closure of the transaction takes place 
is an unexplained input to the process.>  


Reply via email to