On 8/12/2017 6:26 pm, [email protected] wrote:
On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 11:50:41 PM UTC, Bruce wrote:On 1/12/2017 10:43 am, Lawrence Crowell wrote:On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 5:20:51 PM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote: On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 11:16:07 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 9:47:37 PM UTC, Bruce wrote: Collapse would be non-linear and non-unitary -- intrinsically non-reversible. This is not necessarily a problem since there are plenty of non-linearities in physics. It has nothing to do with hidden variables. * * *Why would it be non linear? Brent claimed (on page 1)* Page 1 of what? Weinberg looked into nonlinear QM, and it went nowhere. The linearity of QM is one thing that makes it so bizarre. If you make QM nonlinear you tend to make it obey Bell inequalities.Perhaps you don't make the SE non-linear, but add some other non-linear dynamics, such as the 'flashes' of GRW theory. BruceBut wouldn't this approach still run amok of Bell and be a hidden variable? AG
Not according to the detailed analysis given by Tim Maudlin in his book. His contention is that the generalization of GRW 'flashes' by Temulka resolves the apparent contradiction between non-locality and relativity.
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.
