On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 09:05:49PM +1000, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 7:15 PM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 5 Oct 2019, at 07:14, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 1:10 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> > wrote: > > According to the above non-separable wave function, that means that > Bob > gets only the ket |->, > > > That is vague. It means that Alice will access to the Bobs who get that > state, and never access to the Bobs who did not got it. > > > Exactly. And this is what you are required to explain. Just stating it as a > fact is not an explanation.
ISTM that this follows from the Born rule - the probability of both Alice and Bob seeing the same spin is strictly zero. I understand that there are problems in deriving the Born rule from the MWI, and that derivations that purport to do so (such as mine) are contentious (to put it politely :)). So it doesn't exactly solve the problem, but maybe directs us toward where the solution lies. What I do get is Bruno's point that a single world assumption turns a nonlocal state into FTL "influence", the mechanism of which is quite unimaginable as you point out. An argument by incredulity, as it were, for the MWI. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Senior Research Fellow [email protected] Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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/20191006005045.GX14811%40zen.
