On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 1:21:28 PM UTC-5, smitra wrote: > > > It may look like one can re-interpret QM as being consistent with > Einstein realism, but Bell disproved this (if you assume locality). Note > also what Bruce said about "simultaneously". > >
Not exactly. https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.06712 *A Live Alternative to Quantum Spooks* Huw Price, Ken Wharton *Quantum weirdness has been in the news recently, thanks to an ingenious new experiment by a team led by Roland Hanson, at the Delft University of Technology. Much of the coverage presents the experiment as good (even conclusive) news for spooky action-at-a-distance, and bad news for local realism. We point out that this interpretation ignores an alternative, namely that the quantum world is retrocausal. We conjecture that this loophole is missed because it is confused for superdeterminism on one side, or action-at-a-distance itself on the other. We explain why it is different from these options, and why it has clear advantages, in both cases.* - pt > My own idea is that we need to think about how to interpret time > evolution, instead of making all this fuss about superpositions. Without > collapse, the time evolution of a system can be interpreted as a simple > change of basis. You still have access to the initial state, at least in > theory. But if the system collapses (in the MWI this is then an > effective collapse due to you getting entangled with the system), you > cannot access the initial state anymore (in practice, you might not have > been able to do that anyway). > > This all suggests to me that we live in a multiverse where each moment > of time defines a different universe, memories of the past refer to > alternative universes. We need to keep in mind that in experiments we > can only ever directly measure the present state. If you dig up a bone > of a dinosaur, what you are seeing is a result of processes in your > brain right now. These are then the result of photons interacting with > your eye and ultimately you can draw an inference about life on Earth, > say, 150 million years ago. But an explanation for the presence of the > bones is ultimately just information compression, we can account for > information in our universe "today" in terms of information present in > an alternative "past" universe. > > According to classical physics, information is conserved in a one to one > way between the past and present, and this allows for an interpretation > of time evolution that says that our universe is evolving in time. in QM > this naive interpretation breaks down, information is not conserved > after collapse when you consider only one term of a superposition. But > there is no problem if you just stick to the view where each moment in > time defines a universe. The idea that all information present in one > universe can be accounted for in terms of a single past universe", is > false. > > Another aspect of this is how a particle can tunnel through a potential > barrier. Here there is no intermediary state where the particle is in > the "classically forbidden region". So, we have a final state, an > initial state, but no intermediary state. Clearly this fits in much > better with the idea that time evolution is not real, it just allows you > to account for information in some universe in terms of information in > other universes. > > Saibal > -- 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.
