On 1/6/2026 2:21 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:


On Sunday, January 4, 2026 at 5:58:33 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:



    On 1/4/2026 4:20 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:


    On Friday, January 2, 2026 at 8:27:27 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:

        On Thursday, January 1, 2026 at 8:17:14 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson
        wrote:

            On Monday, December 29, 2025 at 1:55:37 AM UTC-7 Alan
            Grayson wrote:

                On Sunday, December 28, 2025 at 1:32:44 AM UTC-7 Alan
                Grayson wrote:

                    Aren't these results an affirmation of the
                    instantaneous collapse of the wf? AG


                How would Bell results be interpreted using the MWI?
                The results seem easy to interpret under Copenhagen. AG


            I still don't get it. If there's no collapse under the
            MWI, when UP is measured in THIS WORLD, how does the
            OTHER WORLD know to measure DN, ignoring the obvious fact
            that DN is ALSO measured in THIS WORLD?  AG


        UP and DN are both measured in THIS WORLD. What I don't get
        is how adding the observer to the original superposition
        essentially forces the correct pair of ALICE-BOB measurements
        without any action at a distance when the pair are causally
        disconnected. AG


    Assuming Bell experiments imply the non-existence of local hidden
    variables, which I believe is the general consensus, we can
    imagine Alice and Bob having synchronized clocks, and we can
    measure when each measures some spin, UP or DN. If we agree that
    spin angular momentum is conserved, then no matter how close
    their measurements are to simultaneity, spin angular momentum is
    conserved, and in the limiting case where their measurements are
    simultaneous, if Alice measures UP (or DN), then Bob must measure
    DN (or UP). Consequently, I don't see how we can avoid the
    conclusion of some instantaneous "influence" occurring.  Not
    faster than lightspeed, but instantaneous. Nor do I see any way
    the MWI circumvents this conclusion. AG

    They each get some result and when they compare them they find
    they are correlated. Here’s the setup using photons. A pair of
    photons whose polarizations are entangled are created by
    down-conversion in a crystal and are sent to (possibly distant)
    polarizers and detectors.



    The detectors record 0 (didn’t pass the polarizer) or 1 (did pass
    the polarizer). Alice and Bob keep records of the 0’s and 1’s and
    the angle settings in order so that later when they bring their
    records together they can calculate the correlation for each angle
    setting. For a Bell experiment, they do this for different runs
    with their polarizers set at angles 22.5deg and 45deg apart.

    Note that in relativity there is no invariant meaning to “at the
    exact simultaneous time” at different places. They can be at the
    same time in one reference frame, but then they are not at exactly
    the same time in a different, moving, reference frame. The
    experiment only requires that the measurement events be space-like
    separate, i.e. no signal can travel between Alice and Bob so that
    the polarizer setting chosen by Alice influences the photon at
    Bob’s polarizer and vice versa. Bell’s theorem is that under the
    assumption of no-signaling between Alice and Bob a certain
    combination of the correlations must always be less than 2. Alain
    Aspect (and the other two Nobel recipients this year, Zeilinger,
    and Clauser) performed experimental tests of Bell’s theorem and
    showed it was violated over a certain range of angles.



    The measurements are not made at zero relative angle, so measuring
    pass or didn't-pass is not the same at each detector.  Rather they
    are related probabilistically as shown.

    Brent

*
*
*Assuming everything you've written above is correct, can you succinctly explain why it implies local hidden variables don't exist? AG *
*The function of correlations between of angles formed by Bell decreases linearly from 2 to -2 and never exceeds 2, yet the experimental result does exceed 2 at 22.5deg intervals between a, b', a', and b.

Brent*

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d502add7-3a78-42cd-96f3-741882e02451%40gmail.com.

Reply via email to