On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 3:35:01 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 3:03:42 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 2:49:13 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 2:30:31 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 11:07:41 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 4:17:44 PM UTC-5, [email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 8:32:17 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have been around the block on these matters with you. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *In your imagination. AG* >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You have been stuck on these matters since the early days of Vic's >>>>> discussion forum. In spite of mine and other's efforts you keep "not >>>>> getting it." I can't write a treatise here. It would be a waste of time. >>>>> If >>>>> you want to read a book on this look at Redhead's book on the metaphysics >>>>> of QM. I can't advise any further, but you will have to study this in >>>>> greater depth and be willing to cast intuitive and metaphysical baggage >>>>> aside. >>>>> >>>>> LC >>>>> >>>> >>>> I haven't been stuck on anything. As I recall, VIc fell in love with >>>> his theory that time reversal explains non locality. Few took his >>>> explanation seriously, which had many holes (proof by hand waving as it >>>> was, and there are precious few, if any professional physicists who take >>>> his proposal seriously. It was in one of his early books IIRC, and no >>>> references to it in the literature. And physicists are all over the map on >>>> this one, but most find it baffling. I know what you've done. You've just >>>> cobbled together some words that make you happy and create the illusion >>>> you >>>> undIstand the phenomenon. Now you assume an arrogant position. You can say >>>> the pairs are non separable and I wouldn't disagree with the words, but >>>> when one side is measured randomly, the issue is how the other side >>>> adjusts >>>> to keep momentum conserved if it is space-like separated. If the subject >>>> was solved, as you falsely claim, there wouldn't be any resort to the MWI >>>> to allege explanations. Like I said, you can enjoy your words, and they >>>> may >>>> fool yourself, but not me. AG >>>> >>> >>> If you came off your high horse for a moment, you'd realize that Vic >>> introduced time reversal to explain non locality because he couldn't >>> understand it otherwise! And he was writing to explain an ostensibly >>> inexplicable result because there was an unfulfilled need in the community >>> for a model. So unless Vic was a total moron when it came to physics, the >>> understanding of the phenomena is obviously not clear and apparent as you >>> would have it, your advanced metaphysical understanding notwithstanding. AG >>> >> >> Never heard of Redhead. Never heard of any reference to it in any >> discussion of non locality. Maybe he's an outlier, like Joy Christian, and >> many find his arguments weak, or maybe he figured it out. What's the title >> of his book? I am not so arrogant as to deny that possibility, but nothing >> anyone has written here or on Vic's group indicates a viable model, or even >> close. Tossing around words like "non separable" just doesn't cut it. AG >> > > No listing of any book by Redhead on Amazon. AG >
You must be referring to Michael Redhead, who didn't write a book but has an article on EPR published last fall. No citations so probably not hugely insightful, and not easy to download. Requires downloading a program to alter Chrome, which I don't want. AG > >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you refuse to accept them then fine. I can't spend my time trying >>>>>>> to convince creationists of evolution and I can't try to convince >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> who's metaphysical baggage prevents them from accepting something that >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> know is empirically correct. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> *If you were paying even casual attention you'd know I never disputed >>>>>> the empirical finding. AG* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Quantum mechanics with its nonlocality and entanglement tells us >>>>>>> that a quantum system is in many places at once. If I perform a >>>>>>> rotation on >>>>>>> one part of an EPR pair, say by adjusting a magnetic field, the other >>>>>>> part >>>>>>> similarly adjusts. The reason is not because there is a causal >>>>>>> communication, but because the two parts of the EPR pair are not >>>>>>> separable >>>>>>> in space; they are in fact just the same thing, and further this >>>>>>> wholeness >>>>>>> is epistemologically greater. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *I see. The two parts or subsystems are not separable in space >>>>>> despite the fact that the two measurement devices are, and both >>>>>> subsystems >>>>>> are the same thing even though their arguably simultaneous measurements >>>>>> differ. If that makes you happy, I have no quarrel. AG* >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Curiously with quantum field theory a lot of nonlocality is swept >>>>>>> under the rug. The vanishing of equal time commutators on spatial >>>>>>> manifolds >>>>>>> demolishes a lot of this. With quantum fields though since entangled >>>>>>> systems are short lived and decay the entanglement phase is quickly >>>>>>> scrambled into the reservoir of states in the measurement apparatus. It >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> why the LHC is not used to research the foundations of quantum >>>>>>> mechanics. >>>>>>> In fact hadron detectors are colorimeters, which indicates heat an loss >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> quantum coherence. So the loss of physics is not that significant. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, once you bring spacetime into the picture nonlocality >>>>>>> returns. This is one reason quantum field theoretic methods have not >>>>>>> worked >>>>>>> with quantum gravitation. With quantum gravitation nonlocality in fact >>>>>>> returns with a vengence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LC >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- 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.
