On 28 December 2013 18:39, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 28 December 2013 16:26, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net>wrote:
>>>> Answers to your 3 questions.
>>>> 1. No.
>>> If there are no faster-than-light (FTL) influences, then how does your
>>> interpretation address the EPR paradox (
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox )? As a previously mentioned,
>>> according to Bell's theorem, there is only one known solution to the
>>> paradox that does not involve FTL influences, and that is Everett's theory
>>> of many-worlds.
>>> Huw Price's time symmetry also solves the paradox.
> Is this the same as, or related to Cramer's transactional interpretation?
No, it's a lot simpler. It doesn't add any new physics, and removes one
>> Bell agreed with him on this, so I think it's probably a valid result
>> even if not widely known. I'm not sure that Price's ontology is intended as
>> a "rival" to Everett, however, although it may introduce modifications.
> Interesting, do you have any sources you can point me to on this?
I'd start with "Time's arrow and Archimedes' point" by Huw Price.
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 post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.