On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 12:19:04 PM UTC, Bruce wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal <[email protected] <javascript:>> > > On 11 Apr 2018, at 00:47, Bruce Kellett < <javascript:> > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal <[email protected] <javascript:>> > > > Phenomenologically only. But that non-locality does not allow any physical > influence at a distance. Even those not exploitable for communication at a > distance. > > > Non-locality does not allow remote communication, but it does mean that > entangled physical systems are non separable, so what you do at one end of > the entanglement affects the behaviour of the other end. > > > That does not follow from any proof of “non-locality” in Everett Quantum > Mechanics. But that is entailed indeed in QM + the assumption of a unique > physical universe. > > > Surprisingly, perhaps, Everettian QM is identical to standard QM in every > possible experiment/prediction. QM implies non-locality in any > interpretation. > > But, contrary to what you said, only Bruce has tried to show that we keep > some influence at a distance in Everett, but convince nobody, and his > “Everett interpretation” used a notion of “world” which has been shown > inconsistent already with Mechanism. > > > So much the worse for mechanism. > > > You talk like if you knew that there is a world. Show me one evidence. > > > You talk of an "infinity of worlds". Surely that means that there is at > least one? > > I imagine that you see yourself as living in a "world"; and that that > world has a set of relatively consistent properties. Abolish that notion > and life suddenly becomes very difficult indeed! > > > No, mechanism explain why we see ourself as living in a world, but without > committing oneself ontologically. > > > Oh, I see that now you admit that we live in a world. What does > ontological commitment have to do with it? You are just obfuscating again. > > > but once again he just said he already proved that was not true > > ? > > Never said that. On the contrary I have always referred, for this non > locality question in Everett, to either Deustch and Hayden paper, or > Tipler’s paper, or Price Webpage <https://www.hedweb.com> > https://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm > > > Your authorities are terminally flawed, as I have repeatedly shown. If you > can't recall the refutations of these silly papers, then look in the > archives! > > > I answered them. Others too. > > > You may have typed some words in response to my clear refutations of their > arguments, but you have by no means answered the criticisms. Your famed > logic has failed you, once again. > > If you believe in influence at a distance, you are the one needing to show > the evidence of that extra-ordinary fact. > > > The fact is demonstrated by the experiments that test Bell inequalities on > the singlet state. > > You did not. You have even considered a singlet state like if it involves > 4 parallel universes, when it involves infinitely many. See more in the > archive. > > > The singlet state involves only four possible combinations of experimental > results -- each such combination can be identified with a separate > universe. The infinity of universe you keep appealing to are nothing more > than a figment of your imagination; they play no role in the understanding > of the physical situation. It is mere obfuscation on your part. > > Bruno, it is clear that you have no interest in actually understanding the > implications of entanglement in quantum mechanics. >
*It's gratifying that someone understands entanglement. It means two separated subsystems are not really separated. Right? Anything else we need to know? AG* > We could go round these circles for ever, but you are not going to improve > your understanding unless you actually engage with the arguments. > > 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.
