On 12/27/2013 10:54 PM, LizR wrote:
On 28 December 2013 19:37, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com <mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:26 AM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com 

        On 28 December 2013 18:39, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com
        <mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote:

            On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com
            <mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote:

                On 28 December 2013 16:26, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com
                <mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote:

                    On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen 
                    <mailto: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 
                    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 

        No, it's a lot simpler. It doesn't add any new physics, and removes one 

    What is that assumption that is removed?

That simple quantum events have a built in arrow of time. This assumption isn't in the physics, but it's usually in the minds of people when they try to explain EPR, for example, by saying that certain things can't happen "without FTL signalling". Saying this assumes that the particles involved are constrained by what happened to them in the past, but not constrained by what will happen to them in the future. This is a very powerful assumption, built into our nature as macroscopic creatures who are (unfortunately) all too susceptible to the effects of the entropy gradient - but there is no reason it should apply to, for example, individual photons. Assuming that photons act like people as far as the arrow of time goes skews our ideas of what is "reasonable behaviour" for quantum systems, and (according to Prof Price and others) leads us to see lots of things as weird / spooky when they are actually merely exhibiting the time symmetry inherent in the laws of physics.

If we allow past /and/ future constraints to affect particles, for example, any need for FTL effects to explain EPR vanishes, because all the information involved is carried by the particles themselves, which of course never travel FTL. It just happens to be carried in both time directions, with the photon's state in mid-flight affected by both the event that generated it in the past and the measurement that will be applied to it in the future.

Right. This is the same as the idea put forward by Vic Stenger in "Timeless Reality" and Elizur and Dolev in the paper I cited. Information travels both ways along a particle worldline - which is consistent with the time symmetry of the equations.


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