On 13 November 2014 00:48, Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> LizR wrote: > > Bell also realised that his inequality could be explained, while >> preserving realism, locality and causality, by the quantum effects being >> measured obeying time symmetry. If I remember correctly, and rather oddly >> (given that the laws of physics governing the systems used to measure >> Bell's inequality are in fact time-symmetric), he thought this was too >> outrageous to be the correct explanation. >> > > I don't think this was how it was. Bell did not consider backwards-in-time > causation at all seriously. The alternative explanation that he did > consider but felt to be too outrageous, was that the correlations were > explained by some common cause in the remote past, before polarizer > settings were decided. In other words, some common cause that led to the > setting being 'freely' made in such a way that the correlations came out as > observed. He knew that he could not rule this out, but considered it > outrageously unlikely. > > Bell didn't wish to admit this publically, no, because time-symmetry seemed rather more against common sense at the time than it does now. I'm referring to private correspondence he had with Huw Price, which is mentioned in "Time's arrow and Archimedes' point" (unless I'm misremembering and Prof Price mentioned it to me in private correspondence - but I don't think we touched on that). -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
