On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 9:14 AM John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 4:53 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> *> It's a shame that we have spent so much time arguing about this when
>> it is clear that you do not have the remotest understanding of what the
>> issues actually are. The opposite polarization states you mention above are
>> a direct consequence of the non-locality of the non-separable entangled
>> spin state.*
> Right, if Many Worlds and all other non-realistic theories turn out to be
> wrong then things really are non-local, unless they're superdetermined, but
> that's ridiculous.
> As I said in a private communication with you:
> "There is room in the multiverse for there to be a universe that contains
> an Alice who sets her polarizer to ANY angle you care to name, and every
> one of those universes also contains a Bob who has set his polarizer
> parallel to Alice's. And when one sees up polarization ("up" being defined
> as the arbitrary angle Alice decides to set her polarizer) the other is
> absolutely positively 100% certain to see "down" and vice versa.
> There are, of course, universes in which Alice and Bob set their
> polarizers (or Stern–Gerlach magnets) at angles that are neither parallel
> nor orthogonal, but in such universes quantum reality experiments of this
> sort cannot be performed because the entanglement between the photons (or
> electrons) would be destroyed, so they're irrelevant.

There, in that statement, is one of your many sources of confusion. The
entanglement of the spins in the singlet state is a property of the state
itself -- the plorizer settings by either or both of Alice and Bob are
absolutely irrelevant for the existence of the initial entangled state.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 

Reply via email to