John, Read Bell's paper and you will see it is rife with QM language: http://www.drchinese.com/David/Bell_Compact.pdf He also always uses "the value" or "the result" when talking about a measurement, which implicitly references the notion of collapse.
"With the example advocated by Bohm and Aharonov, the EPR argument is the following. Consider a pair of spin one-half particles formed somehow in the singlet spin state and moving freely in opposite directions. Measurements can be made, say by Stern-Gerlach magnets, on selected components of the spins o1 and o2. If measurement of the component o1 * a, where a is some some unit vector,* yields the value* +1 then, according to quantum mechanics, measurement of o2 * a must yield -1 and vice versa." Under many-worlds a measurement does not result in a single outcome. Above, measurement of o1*a would yield both +1 and -1, seen and experienced by the observer who measured o1. The two particles had already measured each other and so the other particle is known to be correlated with the opposite result. The particles carried their correlations at sub-light speeds across space, and the results and effects of measurement spread only at light or sub-light speeds. If you remove Bell's assumption that measurements have single outcomes, the rest of his reasoning that interpretations must be non-local or unreal becomes unfounded. Jason On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 9:19 AM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 2:36 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > Bell derived his inequality assuming QM with collapse >> > > No he did not, Bell makes no such assumption or interpretation, in fact > not one word about Quantum Mechanics is needed in his entire derivation. > None zero zilch goose egg. And that is why even if Quantum Mechanics turns > out to be wrong and is succeeded with a newer and better theory it would > still be true that if things are realistic and local then Bell's inequality > can NEVER BE VIOLATED, provided that high school algebra and trigonometry > are valid. And that is exactly why the experimental discovery that Bell's > inequality WAS VIOLATED was so fundamental and profound. > > John K Clark > > -- > 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 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. > -- 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 firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.