On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 12:03 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Read Bell's paper and you will see it is rife with QM language: >> http://www.drchinese.com/David/Bell_Compact.pdf >> > > I never said Bell didn't know Quantum Mechanics, I said Bell's inequality > can be derived without making the slightest use of it, and in fact I did so > on this very list. > > John K Clark > > > You can prove it without quantum mechanics, but the proof does have some implicit commonsense assumptions which might be violated in various interpretations of QM. For example, the proof assumes that choice by each experimenter of what property to measure is sufficiently "random" that the emitter of the things to be measured (particles or whatever) can't know in advance what they will choose--this might be violated if you assumed some idea of information traveling back in time (although it seems to me that allowing information to travel both backward and forward in time is equivalent to a violation of locality in relativity, since information could travel backward and forward on a zigzag path between two events with a spacelike separation). The proof also assumes that each measurement yields a single definite result--if you instead assume that on measurement each experimenter splits into multiple parallel versions that get different results (as in the many-worlds interpretation), and the universe doesn't have to decide which copy of experimenter #1 gets matched to which copy of experimenter #2 until there's been time for a classical signal to pass from one to the other, then you can have experimental results that consistently violate Bell's inequality without violating locality. Jesse -- 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.