On 11 December 2013 22:26, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> On 11 Dec 2013, at 02:23, 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.)
> But the many worlds don't disappear, unless you invoke a sort of quantum
> conspiracy, which might be true, but it begins to look like a
> super-selection of one branch among the many, and it has to use some
> special initial conditions. It works logically, if you add non-comp, as
> with comp, you get the many computations anyway, without quantum nor comp
> conspiracies or super-determinism.
> I'm not sure if this is intended to do away with the MWI, but it *is* the
simplest explanation for EPR. I would imagine it complements the MWI rather
than being a rival theory. As someone pointed out further down this topic,
it's sort-of analogous to Feynman's explanation of antimatter as "matter
travelling backwards in time". Since matter doesn't actually travel through
time in any direction this is a slightly fanciful notion, but it's useful
for envisioning that at the subatomic level processes can occur equally in
either time direction. I already explained somewhere (perhaps on FOAR) that
most of the processes we think of as time-directed are due to boundary
conditions, mainly the fact that the universe is expanding (for example the
appearance of nucleons from quark soup, the appearance of atoms from
plasma, and so on). The only subatomic process that is known to violate
this principle is kaon decay; whether that is enough to be responsible for
the entropy gradient is an open question, but seems unlikely compared to
the overwhelming (one might say elephantine-in-the-room) existence of
cosmological expansion.

Since one should favour the simplest expanation that handles all the facts,
time symmetry should be considered as a possible explanation for EPR. (But
as "entropic creatures" we have a huge built-in bias against seeing that
this is even possible.)

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.

Reply via email to