On 17 January 2014 07:56, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > On 1/16/2014 1:48 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 16 January 2014 20:00, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > >> On 1/15/2014 7:08 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 16 January 2014 14:11, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >> >>> >>> You can do that (in fact it may have been done). You have two >>> emitters with polarizers and a detector at which you post-select only those >>> particles that arrive and form a singlet. Then you will find that the >>> correlation counts for that subset violates Bell's inequality for polarizer >>> settings of 30, 60, 120deg. >>> >>> I assume that means Price's (and Bell's) assumption that violations of >> Bell's inequality can be explained locally and realistically with time >> symmetry is definitely wrong...? >> >> >> ?? Why do you conclude that? It's the time-reverse of the EPR that >> violated BI. >> >> Because as I (perhaps mis-) understand it, Price claims that we need to > take both past AND future boundary conditions into account to explain EPR > with time symmetry. If we can explain it with only a forward in time or > backward in time explanation, then we aren't using both. > > > But in the reverse EPR we are in effect using both past and future > boundary conditions. At the emitters we set the polarizers - that's the > past boundary condition. At the single detector we post-select only those > incoming pairs that form a net-zero spin; so that's a future boundary > condition. >
I must admit I thought you were saying we could do it using ONLY the future boundary conditions. If you use both then you should logically use both in the forwards case, too, so I assume Price's explanation still stands. > > -- 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.