If what you state is correct, then there's no solution to the measurement problem (if that means discovering a deterministic outcome for individual trials). Why then is the "measurement problem" still considered a problem to be solved? What you've presented is more or less proof that no such solution exists.
On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 11:27:26 AM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > It would make it possible to use EPR like experiments to send signals > faster than light...which is to say backward in time. That would pretty > much screw up all known physics...and common sense. > > Brent > > On 11/9/2017 7:43 AM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > If the measurement problem were solved in the sense being able to predict > exact outcomes, thus making QM a deterministic theory, would that imply an > INCONSISTENCY in the postulates of QM? TIA. > -- > 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] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- 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.
