On 12 February 2014 16:33, Richard Ruquist <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:29 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 12 February 2014 16:23, Richard Ruquist <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Bell's Inequality in my opinion does not explain the mechanism of EPR. >>> The Einstein-Rosen bridge does. It explains how entangled particles >>> maintain their connection. >>> >>>> >>>> I don't understand what you mean. Bell's inequality isn't an >> explanation, it's a number which is violated in the measured results of EPR >> experiments. >> > > You seem to have forgotten my original claim for string theory, that using > Maldacena's duality it explains the mechanism of EPR. *Bell's Inequality > does not explain the mechanism. *Seems you trust math more than physics > or even data as in the other thread. > Shorn of the ad hominem nonsense, that's what I just said. What you said was: String theory based on Maldacena's conjecture predicted the viscosity of > the quark-gluon plasma before it was measured and more recently explained > the mechanism behind EPR based on Einstein-Rosen bridges, which is more > like a retrodiction. > So you are, or appear to be, saying that string theory predicts the viscosity of the quark-gluon plasma based on Maldacena's conjecture, and that it also explains the EPR mechanism using ERBs. Or at least that is the most reasonable way to parse of your sentence. -- 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.
