On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote:
On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Mark A. Rubin <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Rubin_M/0/1/0/all/0/1>
(Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 <http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0103079v1>),
last
revised 10 May 2001 (this version, v2))
Bell's theorem depends crucially on counterfactual reasoning, and is
mistakenly
interpreted as ruling out a local explanation for the correlations
which can be
observed between the results of measurements performed on
spatially-separated
quantum systems. But in fact the Everett interpretation of quantum
mechanics, in
the Heisenberg picture, provides an alternative local explanation for
such
correlations. Measurement-type interactions lead, not to many worlds
but,
rather, to many local copies of experimental systems and the observers
who
measure their properties. Transformations of the Heisenberg-picture
operators
corresponding to the properties of these systems and observers, induced
by
measurement interactions, "label" each copy and provide the mechanism
which,
e.g., ensures that each copy of one of the observers in an EPRB or GHZM
experiment will only interact with the "correct" copy of the other
observer(s).
The conceptual problem of nonlocality is thus replaced with a
conceptual problem
of proliferating labels, as correlated systems and observers undergo
measurement-type interactions with newly-encountered objects and
instruments; it
is suggested that this problem may be resolved by considering quantum
field
theory rather than the quantum mechanics of particles.
Comments: 18 pages, no figures. Minor changes
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
Journal reference: Found. Phys. Lett. 14 (2001) 301-322
Report number: WW-10184
Cite as: arXiv:quant-ph/0103079 <http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0103079>
just moves the problem from FTL signaling to FTL labeling.
Where is the FTL? I don't recall any suggestion that the "contagion" of entangled
systems spreading themeselves in the MWI involves anything FTL.
Of course in Hilbert space there's no FTL because the system is just one point and when a
measurement is performed it projects the system ray onto a mixture of subspaces; spacetime
coordinates are just some labels.
In fact, it's generally assumed to be very, very STL (unless light itself is involved).
At great distances from the laboratory, one imagines that the superposition caused by
whatever we might do to cats in boxes would decay to the level of noise, and fail to
spread any further.
That's an interesting viewpoint - but it's taking spacetime instead of Hilbert space to be
the arena. If we take the cat, either alive or dead, and shoot it off into space then, as
a signal, it won't fall off as 1/r^2.
Brent
So a gaxlaxy (say) might be in a MWI bubble of superpositions that fails to split
neighbouring galaxies for billions of years, because the difference between them is
undetectable. Or maybe even planets.... What difference would it make to anyone in M31
if the Nazis had won WW2? (after the light travel time had elapsed, I mean. Maybe a few
different radio signals could be picked up, if anyone pointed an antenna in the right
direction...)
--
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.
--
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.
