On 12/10/2013 10:47 PM, Jason Resch wrote:

## Advertising

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:19 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:On 12/10/2013 9:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote:On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:53 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/10/2013 5:23 PM, LizR wrote:On 10 December 2013 09:06, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com <mailto: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

`Hmm. I think the transactional waves are not FTL but in an EPR experiment would relay on`

`backward-in-time signaling. Not sure why it says TIQ is explicitly non-local?`

What are the zig-zags?

`By "traveling" back in time and then forward a particle can be at two spacelike separate`

`events.`

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?

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9810080

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?

`No, just that a ray in Hilbert space, a state, corresponds to a solution of the SWE over`

`configuration space (with boundary conditions) which in general is not localized in spacetime.`

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 theymeasure the x-spin or y-spin for the i-th particle depends on the i-th binary digit ofPi at one locations, and the i-th binary digit of Euler's constant at the otherlocation? How can hyper-determinism force the digits of Pi or e?

?? I think the i-th digit pi and the i-th digit of e are already determined. 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 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.