From: *Bruno Marchal* <marc...@ulb.ac.be <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>
You are the one telling that the Bell’s inequality violation entails FTL influence. Personally, I do not dig on that issue, because I use only Everett QM to evaluate what mechanism predicts. I might try to send a post why I do not follow your critic of Tipler and Baylock, some day.
That would be useful. I was perhaps dismissive of Tipler and Baylock because their analyses were so obviously incorrect -- for different reasons, however. Tipler simply collapsed the non-separable state without realizing that that was a non-local operation. Baylock made valiant attempts to introduce some measurements that were not made in order to show that Bell assumed counterfactual definiteness, but his attempts to reconstruct Bell's arguments in this way were so contrived as to be laughable -- Bell's result does not depend on the assumption of counterfactual definiteness.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
