On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 10:25 PM 'scerir' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> In (7) (Brans, 1988) the density for hidden variables depends not only on > the state of the particle pair but also on the detector settings a and b. > (I'm not a fan of superdeterminism. Somedody pointed out that concepts like > falsifiability, isolated system, repetition of an experiment, random > measurement error, are impossible. So, the original motivation for > superdeterminism - > saving locality, I guess - is not present in the picture of the world we > get from > it.) > The Brans paper, at best, shows that the idea of superdeterminism is not inconsistent. In other words, if a fully developed quantum formalism incorporating superdeterminism were developed, it would work as advertised. The trouble is that no such formalism has been developed. And simple reflection shows that it is unlikely that any such formalism could exist -- for instance, it would require an infinite number of inputs in the form of initial conditions. Bruce Il 19/12/2021 11:09 Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 7:59 PM 'scerir' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > > 'Vague statements that the result obtained depends on the > measurement made are either trivial or else meaningless without a > developed quantum formalism that incorporates the requires hidden > variables.' > -Bruce > > Indeed. But somebody wrote something, in 1988. > https://sci-hub.mksa.top/10.1007/bf00670750 > > > So where is the 'developed quantum formalism that incorporates the > required hidden variables'? > > 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLRi1_XRiFPAZ%2BcMNSG%2BT93%2BTLGygrMfKfv3bvRb%3D_5%3DVw%40mail.gmail.com.
