On 4/26/2016 10:29 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote:


On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:51 PM, Brent Meeker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:



    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.


Why do you say that? Do you understand that in the type of scheme I am talking about (and Mark Rubin too, I think), no "matching" between copies of measurement-outcomes at different locations takes place at any location in spacetime that doesn't lie in the future light cone of both measurements?

I think I understand it. Consider a spacelike slice that contains the earliest overlap of the A and B measurment events forward lightcones. On this slice the proper correlated results must obtain, which means that observers at opposite sides of the lightcones from the overlap must also observe the proper correlation - even though they are spacelike relative to the overlap and spacelike relative to one of the measurement events.

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 [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.

Reply via email to