From: *Bruno Marchal* <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
On 31 Jul 2018, at 03:39, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
From: *Jason Resch* <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:57 PM John Clark <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:11 PM, smitra <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>wrote:
/
>
A concept of "influence" without any information transfer is
ambiguous. The meaning of this "influence" will be dependent
on the particular interpretation used, it has no operational
meaning.
/
/
/
Communicating is not the same as influencing, communicating
means transferring Shannon style information and entanglement
can't do that faster than light. But it will still let you
influence things faster than light. Quantum entanglement can
influence things faster than light but you need more than that
to transmit information, you need a standard to measure that
change against, and Quantum Mechanics can't provide that
standard; all it can do is change one apparently random state to
another apparently random state.
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.
Bell's theorem rules out this "common cause" explanation. Such an
explanation would be a local hidden variable account, and that is
ruled out. Claiming that Bell's theorem doesn't apply to many-worlds
doesn't work either. I think that any "common cause" explanation
would have to contend with the Kochen-Specker theorem -- which also
rules out any such hidden variables.
Bell, and Kochen-Specker rule out basically all hidden variable
theory, or make them non local. But when we abandon the collapse, or
any singularisation of a reality through measurement/interaction, I
don’t see how such result would entai action at a distance. If you
have references I am interested.
As I have proved in detail, collapse has nothing to do with it. Bell's
result holds for many-worlds as it does for a single-world theory. The
"Spooky action at a distance" is simply what is observed -- the result
for particle 2 depends on what was done to particle 1, even at
space-like separations. Whether you call this an 'influence' or simple
an 'effect of one measurement on the other', makes little difference.
The point is that there is no information exchange in the normal Shannon
sense of information, so there is no possibility of transmitting a
message by this "influence". In particular, there is no physical FTL
transfer, and special relativity is not violated.
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.
