On 02 Jan 2014, at 18:50, Jason Resch wrote:

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>wrote:On 02 Jan 2014, at 15:11, Jason Resch wrote:On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net>wrote:Jason,Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part ofthe theory I proposed in my separate topic "Another stab at howspacetime emerges from quantum events." Please refer to that topicto confirm...Do you understand how the fact that the spins are determined in theframes of the spinning particles WHEN they are created falsifiesFTL and non-locality?Yes, but I also think this leads to many worlds, since there is nota single state of the superposition.I agree with what you *mean*, but it is pedagogically confusing tosay it in that way. Up+Down *is* a single state (in thecomplementary base).A bag of Up+Down particles behaves differently than a mixture of Upand Down particles.Thanks, I will be sure to make that point more explicit in the future.The particle pair is not just Up_Ddown or Down_Up,Indeed that would be the case of a particle taken in the second bag:the mixture of Up-down and Down-up pairs of particles.but both Up_Down + Down_Up. After the measurement, it isMeasured_Up_Down + Measured_Down_Up.Bell's inequality leads to a refutation that the two particles canhave just a single state.I understand what you mean, but Measured_Up_Down + Measured_Down_Upis a single superposed state, which is indeed the result of thelinearly contagion of Up_Down + Down_Up to the one of the observer.With the universal wave of Everett, there is only one pure quantumstate, and it is perhaps the vacuum state (H=0) which is thesuperposition of all possible complementary states of the universe.In set theory there is something analogous. if you define the unaryintersection INT(x) by the intersection of all y in x, you have thatthe INT({ }) = the set theoretical universe, that is the class ofall sets (which is usually not a set in the most common settheories). It is similar to a^0 = 1.I think I was following until you said it is like a^0 = 1..

`The unary intersection of the empty set is the collection or class of`

`all sets.`

a^0 = 1 is the algebraic version of "the unary & on 0 inputs is true".

`a^0 can be seen also as the set of functions from { } to a, and there`

`is one (the empty function).`

Those are just examples of getting 1, or the whole, from nothing. It is not that deep ... Bruno

JasonWith comp, there is not even such a wave, and I prefer to put thesets in the numbers' epistemology. The wave has to be what theaverage universal machine observes when it looks below itssubstitution level relatively to its most probable computations/universal neighbor.Why does the quantum wave win the measure battle? I think theexplanation is in the "material", probabilistic, intensional nuanceof self-reference.BrunoJason Edgar On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:21:33 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:33 AM, LizR <liz...@gmail.com> wrote: On 1 January 2014 21:34, meekerdb <meek...@verizon.net> wrote: On 12/31/2013 7:22 PM, LizR wrote:On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb <meek...@verizon.net> wrote:Of course in Hilbert space there's no FTL because the system isjust one point and when a measurement is performed it projects thesystem ray onto a mixture of subspaces; spacetime coordinates arejust some labels.I thought there was no FTL in ordinary space, either? (I mean,none required for the MWI?)Right, but the state in Hilbert space is something like |x1 y1 z1s1 x2 y2 z2 s2> and when Alice measures s1 at (x1 y1 z1) then s2 iscorrelated at (x2 y2 z2). As I understand it the MWI advocates saythis isn't FTL because this is just selecting out one of infinitelymany results |s1 s2>. But the 'selection' has to pair up the spinsin a way that violates Bell's inequality.If I understand correctly ... actually, let me just check if I do,before I go any further, in case I'm talking out my arse. Whichwouldn't be the first time.I assume we're talking about an EPR correlation here? If yes, I've never understood how the MWI explains this.The thing to remember is entanglement is the same thing asmeasurement. The entangled pair of particles have measured eachother, but they remain isolated from the rest of the environment(and thus in a superposition, of say UD and DU). Once you as anobserver measure either of the two particles, you have by extensionmeasured both of them, since the position, which you measured hasalready measured the electron, and now you are entangled in theirsuperposition.JasonI've see it explained with ASCII diagrams by Bill Taylor on theFOAR forum, and far be it from me to quibble with Bill, but itnever made sense to me. Somehow, the various branches just join upcorrectly...The only explanation I've come across that I really understand forEPR, and that doesn't violate locality etc is the time symmetryone, where all influences travel along the light cone, but areallowed to go either way in time.So although I quite like the MWI because of its ontologicalimplications, this is one point on which I am agnostic, because Idon't understand the explanation.In fact, it's generally assumed to be very, very STL (unlesslight itself is involved). At great distances from thelaboratory, one imagines that the superposition caused bywhatever we might do to cats in boxes would decay to the level ofnoise, and fail to spread any further.That's an interesting viewpoint - but it's taking spacetimeinstead of Hilbert space to be the arena. If we take the cat,either alive or dead, and shoot it off into space then, as asignal, it won't fall off as 1/r^2.No, but it will travel STL!Sure. I was just commenting on the idea that the entanglement hasa kind of limited range because of 'background noise'. Aninteresting idea, similar to one I've had that there is a smallestnon-zero probability.But if you want to get FTL, that's possible if Alice and Bob arenear opposite sides of our Hubble sphere when they do theirmeasurements. They are then already moving apart faster than c andwill never be able to communicate - with each other, but we, in themiddle will eventually receive reports from them so that we canconfirm the violation of Bell's inequality.Hmm, that's a good point. That would, however, fit in nicely withtime symmetry (which really needs a nice acronym, I'm not sure "TS"cuts it). I tend to evangelise a bit on time symmetry, but onlybecause everyone else roundly ignores it, and it seems to me thatit at least has potential.--You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "Everything List" group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. 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 GoogleGroups "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-l...@googlegroups.com.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 GoogleGroups "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-l...@googlegroups.com.Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "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. --You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "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.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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.