On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 7:40 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote:
*> The Bell inequality can be derived without assuming realism* Everybody is wrong from time to time, but some people just can't admit it. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> urw >> >> Huh? How can you "*have **read quite extensively on Bell's theorem >>>> and locality*" and not know that Bell's theorem is a test to see if >>>> any theory that assumes* local realism* can account for experimental >>>> observations? Hell if you did nothing but skim the Wikipedia article on >>>> Bell's >>>> theorem you should know that because the very first sentence is: >>>> *"Bell's theorem is a term encompassing a number of closely related >>>> results in physics, all of which determine that quantum mechanics is >>>> incompatible with local hidden-variable theories"* >>>> And just a few sentences later Wikipedia says: >>>> *"Its derivation here depends upon two assumptions: first, that the >>>> underlying physical properties and exist independently of being observed or >>>> measured (sometimes called the assumption of realism); and second, that >>>> Alice's choice of action cannot influence Bob's result or vice versa (often >>>> called the assumption of locality)"* >>>> >>> >>> -- 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/CAJPayv08F%2B%2BLENzECL7G5AKp0OQK3BMw-0Eyeh4%3DEOoj25VLcQ%40mail.gmail.com.
