### W. Myrvold wrote something here
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/11654/ (see
ch. 0.8)
It seems that he is saying that 'action-at-a-distance' is something
that would violate the 'no-signalling theorem' of quantum mechanics.
So he sees experimental violation of the Bell inequalities as
evidence for non-locality, but not necessarily evidence for
action-at-a-distance in the above sense. I would agree with his
conclusion that both collapse and Everettian theories are like this
-- non-local, but also non-signalling at spacelike separations.
Bruce
### Yes, It seems so. There is - in general - some confusion between
'nonlocality' and 'nonseparability'. Not to mention also 'action-at-a-distance'
and 'locality of measurement' and "local causality" and so on. Myrvold et al.
wrote something else here
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/4222/1/everett_and_evidence_21aug08.pdf
(general objections to Everettism).
"Now it is precisely in cleaning up intuitive ideas for mathematics that one is
likely to throw out the baby with the bathwater."
J.S. Bell (quoted here https://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.3724.pdf )
--
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.
