On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 9:00 AM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > On 25-03-2022 22:13, Brent Meeker wrote: > > On 3/25/2022 1:06 PM, smitra wrote: > >> > >> I explained in the other rely why this is false. The known fundamental > >> laws of physics are local. > > > > I don't know what that means. Fundmental interactions are local. But > > that locality is what makes the bit sequences written by Alice and Bob > > in their notebooks statistically independent and hence violating > > Bell's inequality which in turn implies some non-local effect. So the > > result is non-local by any definition of "local" I'm aware of. > > The violation of Bell's inequalities implies a non-local effect in case > of deterministic theories,
You will have to explain this in more detail. It is MWI that is the deterministic theory; ordinary QM is not deterministic. The local hidden variable account of the QM predictions that people seek is a deterministic theory, involving local FTL interactions. But Bell's theorem rules out such local HV theories. So we are left with QM, which is non-local. No local explanation of the Bell correlations is possible. it doesn't apply to QM assuming that QM is > fundamental. See e.g. this comment by Sidney Coleman: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtyNMlXN-sw&t=1958s Put Coleman's point in your own words and then we can discuss it. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTpkc1-cjaiDZrnpk4aDOFwtauRo%2Bimm-K_NK-g-nQWqg%40mail.gmail.com.
