[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
- From: Anonymous <[email protected]>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 01:55:09 +0100 (MET)
- Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.Please report problems or inappropriate use to theremailer administrator at <[email protected]>.
- Sender: [email protected]
Eric Cordian writes:
> Anonymous writes:
> > Tim May knows no more about quantum mechanics than he does about
> > cryptography. He is wrong about the nature of the correlation between
> > the two photons.
> Tim is right. Please put this lovely cone-shaped hat on and sit on
> the stool in the corner.
So, you agree with Tim May's statement that:
> All that is revealed is a _correlation_, a kind of structure built into the
> Universe. Interesting, but not so weird as it seems. (And this is not any
> kind of "action at one site instantaneously changing the state far away."
> No more so than sending two envelopes out, one with a "1" inside and the
> other with a "0" inside changes things instantaneously.....)
You agree with the foolish statement that the behavior of correlated
photons is no more weird than sending out two envelopes? I thought you
had more sense than that.
Are you under the impression that opening envelopes can in any way
violate Bell's inequality, as measuring correlated photons can? Please!
How do you explain the violation of Bell's theorem in QM? What is your
nice, cozy, friendly, un-weird explanation? I'm curious whether you are
going to sacrifice locality or reality. Somehow I think you'll have to
go beyond what is necessary to explain the behavior of envelopes.