On 28 December 2013 18:39, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 28 December 2013 16:26, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Jason, >>>> >>>> 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 assumption. > > >> 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 [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.
