On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:53 AM John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And local hidden variables are ruled out by experiment *only* if you > assume things are realistic. Well OK... technically you also have to assume > things are not Superdeterministic, but if that's not a reasonable > assumption nothing is. > I still 'really' have no idea what you mean by' realism'. I suggest you read Maudlin's paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.1826 He discusses the EPR criterion of realism, known usually as "Einteinian realism" and shows that this criterion is analytic -- depending only on the meanings of the words involved. Rejecting Einstein's version of realism does not invalidate Bell's result (it just shows that you do not know what the words mean.....) -- the observed violations of Bell's inequality show that nature is non-local. 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/CAFxXSLRDUXMpi-Ap8Q7zALO37c8vpu_YB-%3DfcQJ7rTKFaV8-zw%40mail.gmail.com.
