From: *Bruno Marchal* <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
On 31 Jul 2018, at 04:05, John Clark <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 9:14 PM, Jason Resch <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>wrote:
>>
You and I have quantum entangledcoins, I'm on Earth and
you're in the Andromeda Galaxy 2 million light years away. I
flip my coin 100 times and record my sequences of heads and
tails and then just one hour later you do the same thing.
/
>
It doesn't work like that. You need to generate the coins at one
location, then bring them separately (at sub C speeds) from the
location they were created to Earth and Andromeda. It's because
of this that FTL is not not needed under QM to explain EPR. If
it worked as you said then it would require FTL. But you can't
keep flipping the same coin./
I was simplifying things to get to the essential difference between a
communication and a influence and you're just changing one apparently
random sequence to a different apparently random sequence and the
only way to tell that something funney is going on is when the two
results are checked sinde by side which can only be done at the speed
of light or less. But if you want exact then substitute the coins for
2 streams of 100 spin correlated electrons created midway between
Andromeda and Earth and replace the coin flips for 2 Stern Gerlach
magnets oriented the same way.
If Alice and Bob are space-separated, and that they have not yet
measure anything, how could they know (first person) that they are in
the same branch?
Very easily. They had coffee together beforehand. They were in the same
branch then, and have not jumped between branches in the meantime.
How do you make sense on this if only locally? There is an infinity of
Bob and Alice,
No, there are not any infinities of anything. You simply confuse
yourself by continuing to claim such things which are not part of
quantum mechanics.
and all what they both know is that they share some historical reality
with a relative partner, so that their simps are correlated, but they
are are ignorant and thus distributed on infinitely many histories,
with all the correlation between different spin “angle” (assuming a
fixed base to describe them).
I might be wrong, but the violation of Bell’s inequality (or
Kochen-Specker theorem) does not entail any physical instantaneous
action at a distance. I have seen may attempt to prove this, but they
always favour a branch in a way or another, forgetting the
probabilities bear on different portioning of the multiverse in the
big picture.
Any evaluation of a set of correlations between experimental results
happens in one branch of the superposition. So much for "favouring a
branch in a way or another." There is simply no other way to evaluate
the correlations. There is no "big picture" that is going to change this
conclusion.
It makes the whole physics becoming covariant, despite necessary
relative local appearance of what seem to be an action at a distance.
There are none, but to show this, we must take into account the fact
that Alice and Bob find all correlated results in all directions.
Physics is covariant in any case. The non-locality is real -- it is not
just an 'appearance'. Bell's theorem and the observed correlations prove
this.
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.
