On Saturday, April 21, 2018 at 9:07:37 PM UTC, smitra wrote: > > On 21-04-2018 21:44, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > On Saturday, April 21, 2018 at 3:12:48 PM UTC-4, smitra wrote: > > > >> On 20-04-2018 02:44, Brent Meeker wrote: > >>> On 4/19/2018 5:29 PM, smitra wrote: > >>>> One can a priori rule out any non-local effects using the fact > >> that > >>>> the dynamics as described by the Schrödinger equation is local. > >> So, in > >>>> any theory where there is no collapse and everything follows from > >> only > >>>> the Schrödinger equation, there cannot be non-local effects > >>> > >>> The wave-function exists in configuration space so a point in it > >>> already refers to multiple points in 3space. > >>> > >>> Brent > >> > >> Yes, but that doesn't yield any non-local effects. > >> > >> Saibal > > > > Why would you think it would, or should? Even the wf for the singlet > > system doesn't do that on its face. It's the Bell statistics that > > establish non locality. AG > > > What the Bell statistics prove is that any hidden variable theory that > would explain why in an experiment we obtain one result rather than one > of the other possible results, would necessarily have to be a non-local > theory. This means that if we reject non-local theories, we have to > reject any hidden variable theory. > > While one considers the special case of entangled particles to get this > result, the conclusion is, of course, valid in general: If there were a > hidden variable theory underlying QM, it would have to fully reproduce > QM and one can then show using the special case of entangled particles > that the actual dynamics of the hidden variable theory must be > non-local. > > But as long as we stay away from any hypothetical hidden variable theory > (there isn't a shred of evidence for such theories) any non-locality > associated with such theories is totally irrelevant. > > Saibal >
I really don't understand your comments, which doesn't mean they're wrong. I will try again. However, I do think that since collapse is presumed to be instantaneous, it seems to imply non locality. Aren't we assuming collapse in the analysis of the singlet state? If so, non locality is baked in the pie, so to speak. AG > > > > -- > > 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 > > [1]. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout [2]. > > > > > > Links: > > ------ > > [1] https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > > [2] 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.
