On Monday, November 11, 2024 at 7:08:13 AM UTC-7 John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 6:51 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote:

*>>  maybe things are realistic, maybe an entangled pair of electrons has 
ONE AND ONLY ONE spin axis before a measurement. But maybe that's false, 
maybe an entangled pair has EVERY axis spin that is not forbidden by the 
quantum wave before 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. *

*To me it seems like experiments are virtually shouting that Many 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 Equation and 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 you in a very long post. *


 *TY,  but you didn't explictly prove it, and that's why I didn't get it. 
It's in my to-do list. AG*

*Basically I showed that if you use that [COS (X)]^2 rule (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 that an 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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9174495f-48ff-4991-b12b-58af8dc0b5b6n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to