On 21/11/2017 5:24 pm, [email protected] wrote:
On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 10:50:35 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote:

    On 21/11/2017 4:38 pm, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote:
    On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 10:22:44 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote:

        On 12/11/2017 4:34 am, John Clark wrote:

        ​
        The title of this thread is about the consistency of Quantum
        Mechanics, but far more important than QM is the ability of
        ANY theory to be compatible with experimental results, and
        one of those experiments shows the violation of Bell's
        Inequality. And that violation tells us that for ANY theory
        to be successful at explaining how the world works AT LEAST
        one of the following properties of that theory must be untrue:

        1) Determinism
        2) Locality
        3) Realism

        You have repeated this claim several times, John, but it is
        not strictly true. Maudlin summarizes it like this:

        "Early on, Bell's result was often reported as ruling out
        /determinism/, or /hidden variables/. Nowadays, it is
        sometimes reported as ruling out, or at least calling in
        question, /realism/. But these are all mistakes. What Bell's
        theorem, together with the experimental results, proves to be
        impossible is not determinism or hidden variables or realism,
        but /locality, /in a perfectly clear sense/. /What Bell
        proved, and what theoretical physics has not yet properly
        absorbed, is that the physical world itself is non-local."


    Which begs the question; operationally, what does non local mean? AG

    It doesn't 'beg the question'! It might raise the question....

    Non-local means that disturbing one particle of the singlet
    influences the other, at a distance and instantaneously. Read
    Maudlin to find out more about what these terms mean.

    Bruce


There's an ambiguity in English as to what "beg the question" means.

Not really. Look up Wikipedia for /petitio principii/. It is not ambiguous -- just often misused.

I meant it as you say. Does non locality mean the future influences the past as Clark alleged?

No.

Does it mean the non existence of local hidden variables?

Yes.

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.

Reply via email to