On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:19 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 9:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:53 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 12/10/2013 5:23 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 10 December 2013 09:06, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Bell's theorm proves that local hidden variables are impossible which >>> leaves only two remaining explanations that explain the EPR paradox: >>> >>> 1. Non-local, faster-than-light, relativity violating effects >>> 2. Measurements have more than one outcome >>> >>> In light of Bell's theorem, either special relativity is false or >>> many-world's is true. >>> >>> Bell realised there was a third explanation involving the relevant >> laws of physics operating in a time symmetric fashion. (Oddly this appears >> to be the hardest one for people to grasp, however.) >> >> >> Yes, that idea has been popularized by Vic Stenger and by Cramer's >> transactional interpretation. >> > > Collapse is still fundamentally real in the transactional > interpretation, it is just even less clear about when it occurs. The > transactional interpretation is also non-local, non-deterministic, and > postulates new things outside of standard QM. > > > I think it's still local, no FTL except via zig-zags like Stenger's. > > > > This table should be updated in that case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics#Comparison_of_interpretations What are the zig-zags? > > Why? Everett showed the Schrodinger equation is sufficient to explain > all observations in QM. > > > But it's non-local too. If spacelike measurement choices in are made in > repeated EPR measurements the results can still show correlations violating > Bell's inequality - in the same world. > Can you explain the experimental setup where this happens? > The Schrodinger equation has solutions in Hilbert space, which are not > local in spacetime. > > Are you referring to momentum vs. position basis ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/pr/which_basis_is_more_fundamental/ ) or something else? > > Is it just so people can sleep soundly at night believing the universe > is small and that they are unique? > > >> There's also hyperdeterminism in which the experimenters only *thinks* >> the can make independent choices. t'Hooft tries to develop that viewpoint. >> > > Hyper-determinism sounds incompatible with normal determinism, as it > seems to imply a the deterministic process of an operating mind is forced > (against its will in some cases), to decide certain choices which would be > determined by something operating external to that mind. > > I think I can use the pigeon hole principle to prove hyper-determinism > is inconsistent with QM. Consider an observer whose mind is represented by > a computer program running on a computer with a total memory capacity > limited to N bits. Then have this observer make 2^n + 1 quantum > measurements. If hyperdeterminism is true, and the results matches what the > observer decided to choose, then the hyper-determistic effects must be > repeating an on interval of 2^n or less. > > > There's nothing in the theory to limit the capacity to local memory, if > hyper-determinism is true, it's true of the universe as a whole. > What if we have two remote locations measuring entangled particles, and whether they measure the x-spin or y-spin for the i-th particle depends on the i-th binary digit of Pi at one locations, and the i-th binary digit of Euler's constant at the other location? How can hyper-determinism force the digits of Pi or e? Jason > > Brent > > > It is provable that no deterministic process limited to a fixed quantity > of memory (and therefore a fixed number of states) can go through more than > 2^n states without repeating, so either the randomness in QM will repeat, > or the observer will get to states where their choices cannot be made to > continue to agree with quantum measurements. > > Jason > -- > 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
