On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:19 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

## Advertising

> On 12/10/2013 9:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:53 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > >> On 12/10/2013 5:23 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 10 December 2013 09:06, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.