On 4/26/2016 8:38 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote:
OK, let's say experimenter A measures particle 1, and experimenter B measures particle 2. Any given copy of particle 1 has a "label" that says something about the state of 2--we can imagine that the copy of particle 1 carries a little clipboard on which is written down both its own quantum state, and a quantum state it assigns to particle 2. When that copy of 1 is measured, it not only adjusts its own state (to an eigenstate of the measurement operator), it also adjusts the state it has written down for 2. You seem to be assuming, in effect, that when a copy of 1 adjusts what it has written down for the state of 2 on its own clipboard, this must mean that copies of 2 also instantaneously adjust what they have written down about *their* own state. However, in a copying-with-matching scheme, there's no reason this need be the case!
That's pretty much the many-universes model that Bruno proposes. But it's non-local in the sense that the "matching scheme" must take account of which measurements are compatible, i.e. it "knows" the results even while they are spacelike separated.
Brent -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
