On 7/03/2016 4:52 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2016, at 23:12, Brent Meeker wrote:
When Everett proposed QM without collapse many people were attracted
to it just because it was deterministic.
That is a motivation enough, but as I have explained, and is not to
badly explained in the book by Susskind and Friedman (except that you
have to read many pages before getting the quasi-answer) it restores
full locality.
This is a claim that is frequently made -- you yourself, Bruno, have
made it several times. But I think the claim is false. The general
consensus these days is that QM is irreducibly non-local. If you have an
argument that purports to show that Everettian MWI restores locality,
then produce it. And give the argument yourself -- do not take the lazy
route of referring to papers of dubious reliability.
Bruce
Just to be unique, we have to invent two very weird mysterious things:
events without cause, and spooky action at a distance. It seems
obvious it is conceptually simpler to abandon the axiom "I am unique",
given that the theory explain where that illusion comes from.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
