On 10 May 2016, at 09:00, 'scerir' via Everything List wrote:
Bruno (I suppose) wrote:
But in the MWI, some work needs to be done (at least) to convince
me. I don't even find a paper on the subject, only paper which
shows that MWI is local (some more rigorous than other). Do you
have a reference of a paper showing that Bell's inequality
violation entails non locality in the MWI? I would like to take a
look on it, if it exists.
### W. Myrvold wrote something here http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/11654/
(see ch. 0.8)
Thanks Scerir, but yet again, this paper get the same conclusion as
mine (and most people here). With the MWI, non-locality does not imply
action-at-a distance. (d'Espagnat would call it non-separability).
What I look for would be a paper which would show that in the MWI
there are action-at-a-distance, like Bruce and John C claim.
I might comment later, as I am late in my scheduling, but will just
notice that Gisin's paper (mentionned by Brent) use the non-
compatibilist theory of free-will, which makes no-sense to a
mechanist. I think Brent concluded similarly.
Bruno
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
