On 10/1/2019 4:55 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:12 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 9/30/2019 11:06 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:You say the light carrying the information isn't coherent, but it's not just the light that carries the information; it's information encoded in the wave function of the environment. That information encoded in the wave function of the environment has to be coherent if the impossible branches are to cancel out. And that coherence must originate in the measurement interactions that Alice and Bob perform. And that is non-local, since Bob and Alice are space like separated.You're right. You're conceding? I expected more of an argument.....
I thought about it some more.
You couldn't scan the relevant section of Carroll's book and send it to me, could you? Please. I would like to see how Carroll attempts to get out of the non-locality issue.....
Carroll doesn't try to deny non-locality. It's just that he draws a diagram such as Bruno suggests in which the results of Alice and Bob propagate futureward as waves of splitting which eventually overlap and the results can be compared. Then he also draws the other diagram in which there is a space-like hypersurface thru Alice and Bob's measurement events (at the same time) and the universe splits then. He says it doesn't matter which you use.
Brent -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/20d3703f-4b44-e980-250b-46e46d637ede%40verizon.net.
