On 11/10/2024 3:51 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Sunday, November 10, 2024 at 5:46:00 AM UTC-7 John Clark wrote: On Sat, Nov 9, 2024 at 9:40 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: /> the fact that neither member of an entangled pair has a preexisting spin before measurement,/ *Maybethat's true, 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*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 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. Then, along the same axis, one of the pair is measured as spin UP, and there's a correlation with the other pair member measuring spin DN, so conservation of spin is satisfied. So there's a mystery; how can the correlation exist when the electrons are far beyond causal distance? Is this correct, or does Brent have the "exact" solution and now awaits for his Nobel prize? AG
That's an oversimplified version, one that would be satisfied in classical mechanics. Try reading up on the experiment.
Brent -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/42470011-7284-4bfc-933d-2848d318cafd%40gmail.com.
