On 11/11/2024 6:07 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 6:51 PM Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com>
wrote:
*>> maybe things are realistic, maybe an entangled pairof
electrons has _ONE____AND ONLY ONE_ spin axisbefore a
measurement. But maybe that's false, maybe an entangled pair
has _EVERY_ axisspin that is not forbidden by the quantum
wavebefore a measurement. *
/> I thought the choice of measurement axis is arbitrary, and any
axis can be used. AG/
*It is completely arbitrary, but whatever arbitrary access you choose
to measure you seem to endow that particular axis, out of the infinite
number of other axes you could have chosen, as being special. And that
seems very strange, especially because in most quantum interpretations
the definition of the word "measurement" is extremely murky. The one
exception is Many Worlds, in it a measurement is simply a change.
*
No, it's a very special kind of change that causes the world to split
into orthogonal sub-worlds in such a way that the sub-worlds have
"weights" or "numbers" implementing the Born rule*, *but everything in
each world is the same except things that depend on the measurement
result.**But since "measurement" is not special (it's just any
interaction) there are a bazillion measurements per second, if not
more,**and each one causes the world to split. It's not clear whether
these "measurements" propagate world splits instantaneously or at the
speed of light.*
*Brent*
*
*To me it seems likeexperiments are virtually shouting thatMany Worlds
is true, and it's the simplest explanation; unlike objective collapse
it doesn't need to add a new term to Schrodinger's Equation that makes
it non-deterministic. And unlike pilot wave it doesn't need a second
extremely complicated equation, in addition to Schrodinger's Equation,
that does nothing but keep track of which world is "real" and which
one is not. You have to work very hard to get rid of those Many Worlds
that are an inherent consequence of Schrodinger's Equationand for that
reason some have called pilot wave the Disappearing Worlds Theory. *
*S**o why hasn't Many Worlds been the dominant interpretation since
the 1920s? I think there are two reasons, both of them emotional,
neither of them logical. *
*
*
*1) It can't be right because it would make the universe too big.
Strangely this sentiment is expressed even among those who insist that
the universe is infinite. *
*
*
*2) It can't be right because I never feel myself splitting. This is
similar to the objection that Galileo heard, the Earth can't be moving
because I don't feel myself moving. *
*>> The violation of Bell's Inequality cannot rule out either
possibility. We do know that _IF_ the world is realistic _THEN
_it cannot be both local and deterministic. We also know that
you will never measure the spin of an electron to be zero or
one because that is forbidden by the quantum wave, instead you
will always get 1/2[or -1/2] because the quantum wave demands
that. *
/> CMIIAW, but I think Bell experiments are done this way; an
entangled pair of electrons are created with zero net spin, and
sent in opposite directions, far beyond causal distance./
*You are correct except that they used correlated photons and
polarizing filters instead of electrons and Stern Gerlach magnets
(which measure spin), they could've used electrons but they use
photons because they are easier to deal with experimentally than
electrons. *
*
*
*If 2 billion years ago a correlated pair of photons was created, and
1 billion years later I randomly pick an axis (let's call that 0
degrees) and set my polarizing filter to that axis, then regardless of
which axis I choose there is a 50% chance the photon will make it
through and a 50% chance it will not, let's suppose it does not. One
billion years later you arbitrarily pick an axis and you set your
polarizing filter to that axis. If you just happen to pick the same
axis I did there is a 100% chance the other in entangled photon will
make it through your filter, but if for example the axis that you
picked is 30 degrees different than mine then there is only a 75%
chance your photon will make it through your filter; this is because
[COS (X)]^2 =0.75 if X = 30 DEGREES (π/6 radians).*
/> I don't YET _know_ how Bell's inequality is derived/
*I tried to explain that to youin a very long post.Basically I showed
that if you use that [COS (X)]^2rule (see above) about polarized
light, which has been known for centuries, and if the strange behavior
in the quantum world is caused by local hidden variables, then certain
correlations are impossible; however experiments have shown that those
correlations _ARE_ possible, therefore the strange behavior of the
quantum world cannot be due to local hidden variables. *
/> the Bell experiments suggest transference of information at
distances exceeding causality. /
*
*
*I doubt it's correct but pilot wave theory speculates thatan
influence can travel faster than light, but it would be wrong to call
that influence "information". Even if pilot wave is correct, a faster
than light telegraph would still be impossible. *
***John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>*
eeb
*
*
t
--
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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3cEFWmRk6rAvX06Ssa%3DpW6c3i8Pc2r6VeSaNfEQRZUpQ%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3cEFWmRk6rAvX06Ssa%3DpW6c3i8Pc2r6VeSaNfEQRZUpQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/871c4aa6-50b9-4234-8948-0bbb1bffe576%40gmail.com.
