In https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.04334 I show that the Bell inequalities follow as well from the logic of plausible reasoning also named the objective Bayesian interpretation of probability theory.
Conceptually, in the objective Bayesian interpretation of probability, it is an extension of logic for the case of plausible reasoning. The axioms are,…[Read more]
Federico Comparsi replied to the topic Testing the reality of Wigner’s friend’s experience in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
“However, we emphasise once more that those correspond to observed events, and note that we make no assumption
about hidden variables predetermining all measurement outcomes.”
Regarding the first part of the quoted sentence, I would like to note that from Alice’s perspective those events observed by Charlie are not more real than hidden…[Read more]
Federico Comparsi replied to the topic A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE EPR ARGUMENT AND BELL'S THEOREM in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 day, 5 hours ago
New version of the paper, feedback are welcome:
Charlie Beil started the topic Quantum nonlocality using Aristotle's notion of time in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 3 days, 6 hours ago
My paper addressing quantum nonlocality in a spacetime framework, using Aristotle’s notion of time:
Quantum gravity from nonnoetherian spacetime
Comments/criticism very welcome.
Richard Healey replied to the topic Beyond Bell? in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 5 days, 16 hours ago
Thanks, Jerry: that’s interesting.
I am guessing that your answer is “no” and that the only allowed possibilities are that Alice sees “+1” both times and that Bob sees “-1” both times, or visa versa.
For the spacelike separated case you describe, “no” is indeed my answer.
You are right to distinguish superluminal influence from superl…[Read more]
Jerry Finkelstein replied to the topic Beyond Bell? in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 week, 2 days ago
Hi Richard –
Thank you for your response to my earlier posting. I had understood that
you were agreeing with Shan that Alice would expect 50% of her results to
be “+1”; this clarification eliminates my worry about a contradiction
between the expectations of Alice and Bob. Alice would say that each
individual result has a probability of 50%…[Read more]
Reply to Aurelien: No, RTI has emphatically nothing to do with Bohr or the Copenhagen interpretation, which I criticize and reject here:https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.07545
If you read my publications, you will find that I assign objective physical reality to quantum states and the advanced states. You seem to be implicitly assuming that for something…[Read more]
To Shan: That is correct. The collapse occurs with respect to projection operators (outer products), not with respect to kets. That is, from absorber response to each component we get two weighted projection operators:|Psi1><Psi1| and |Psi2><Psi2|, where each is weighted by the Born Rule based on the prepared state. So if the prepared state was…[Read more]
Richard Healey replied to the topic Beyond Bell? in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 week, 4 days ago
A little clarification:
Healey and Gao agree Alice expects the result “+1” only 50% of the time
In her situation prior to each of her individual measurements Alice expects each of its possible results to be equally likely. But in her situation prior to the whole sequence of her future measurements Alice expects eit…[Read more]
In this paper I will re-examine the EPR argument and Bell’s theorem putting particular emphasis on the relevant points for the analysis of the problem of locality (milestone of general relativity and classical field theories). I will clearly state the logical and mathematical
assumptions present in these cornerstones of foundations of q…[Read more]
editor replied to the topic Beyond Bell? in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 week, 5 days ago
Thanks for your useful comments, Jerry!
Jerry Finkelstein replied to the topic Beyond Bell? in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 1 week, 5 days ago
In the case in which Bob’s measurement occurs after Alice’s, Richard
Healey and Shan Gao agree that Alice would expect to obtain the result
“+1” about 50% of the time. Let’s think about what Bob would expect
Alice’s results to be. I will suppose, to make the story more
definite, that Bob’s own measurement has the result “-1”.
Consider first…[Read more]
Dear Ruth, thanks a lot . Still I don’t think that you are completely right : your view is like the one of Heisenberg for the passage from the potential to the actual and when you wrote ” “Collapse” in RTI is actualization of a single invariant spacetime interval from a set of non-spatiotemporal set of possibilities, represented by wei…[Read more]
editor replied to the topic Quantum theory is incompatible with relativity: A proof beyond Bell's theorem in the forum 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell's theorem 2 weeks ago
Thanks, Ruth. So, the collapse is not the superposition psi1 + psi2 randomly becomes psi1 or psi2 for the forward-propagating state or the the backward-propagating state?
Dear Aurelien, RTI does not require any preferred foliation; it does not require any future boundary condition. It is not a hidden variable approach nor does it rely on a notion that measurement outcomes are ‘already there’ in the future–i.e. it is not a block world ontology. I understand that the original TI may have seemed to imply that, but…[Read more]
Thanks Shan. In RTI the quantum state |Psi> is fully ontic. But the advanced state <Psi| is also fully ontic, so RTI is a different animal from the usual ‘quantum interpretation.’ This is why it is not subject to the dilemma you pose. It has real ontic collapse, but the collapse is not with respect to just a forward-propagating quantum state. In…[Read more]
Ilja Schmelzer joined the group 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell’s theorem 2 weeks ago
In particular, quantum theory missed asymptotic superselection rules which restrict the action of the superposition principle in some scattering problems for closed systems with asymptotically free dynamics.
As is known, when discussing Bell inequalities, it is very important to identify all (explicit and implicit)…[Read more]
- Load More