On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:39 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> >> exparament has proven beyond doubt that Bell's inequality is WRONG. > > > * > You mean Bell's inequality is violated by quantum entanglements* > No, I mean only that Bell's inequality is wrong and we know that from experiment; reasonable people can argue over why it is wrong but not over the fact that it is wrong. > > ...which means at least one of its premises is not true. The obvious > one is locality. > Maybe, although if one thing can have an instant affect on something halfway across the universe that is not diminished by distance then it's amazing humans have managed to figure out as much physics as they have, it sorta seems like you'd have to understand everything before you could understand anything. So maybe its something else, maybe it's Realism that's wrong, something has to be. >>If realism is true then things, like the spin of an electron or the >>polarization >> of a photon, exist even when they are not being observed and they always >> exist in one and only one definite state. > > > > * > Then that state is a local variable and would make it impossible to > violate Bell's inequality.* > If a state doesn't change then it isn't a variable. And local hidden variables are ruled out by experiment *only* if you assume things are realistic. Well OK... technically you also have to assume things are not Superdeterministic, but if that's not a reasonable assumption nothing is. John K Clark -- 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/CAJPayv0CJsouYOYY02A_77n3d1h45h9a-U41cPP2axKZrLA95g%40mail.gmail.com.
