On 27/04/2016 3:22 pm, Jesse Mazer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Bruce Kellett
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Your simulation assumes the quantum mechanical results. In other
words, it assumes non-locality in order to calculate the
statistics. Where does the cos^2(theta/2) come from in your analysis?
The question I asked you was whether you thought you could
definitively disprove the idea that all the observable statistics of
QM could be reproduced by rules that are "local" in the specific
narrow sense I had described to you--remember all that stuff about
having computers determining what the value of local variables at each
point in spacetime should be, using only information about the value
of local variables in the past light cone of that point, plus the
general rules programmed into them (which take that information about
the past light cone as input, and spit out the value of local
variables at that point as output)? This is a narrow and
mathematically well-defined question (and is based specifically on how
Bell defined 'locality'), it's completely irrelevant to the question
whether or not the *idea* for the rules that I programmed into the
computers that perform these local calculations came from looking at
some equations that are written in a 'non-local' way (i.e., the
equations generate their predictions by evolving a single 'state
vector' for the entire spatially-distributed system). Do you
understand this distinction between the narrow, well-defined
definition of "local rules" (if you're unclear on what I mean here,
please ask), and broader questions about what inspired the rules
themselves? And are you claiming that even if we restrict our
attention to the narrow definition of "local rules", you can still say
with 100% certainty that no such "local rules" can accurately
reproduce all the predictions about measurement outcomes made by QM?
Your question, as outlined above, is completely devoid of interest to me
as a physicist. I am interested in physical models that give an insight
into how things come about.
And yes, I am 100% certain that local rules, with local models for
deciding what statistics should be reproduced to mimic quantum results
on entangled systems, are impossible. Rules that deal with non-locally
produced statistical distributions can do anything you want -- vide my
urn model -- they simply have nothing to do with physics, can teach us
nothing about physics. If your model does not explain where the
cos^2(theta/2) comes from, it is totally without interest.
Bruce
--
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.
