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.>
