Dr H video on "spooky action at a distance"

[notFritzArgelander]

[Ylem]

I had to bookmark, due to time, but I have always loved this subject.

Thanks

[notFritzArgelander]

I had to bookmark, due to time, but I have always loved this subject.

Thanks

This is a very good one. You're in for a treat.

[notFritzArgelander]

It's an excellent video insofar is it clarifies Einstein's position in a way that agrees most closely with Einstein. However, I think that there is a conceptual problem that is unclear.

For one thing, the requirement that all theories be local theories is only an assumption. If Nature makes room in the quantum domain for something that looks like action at a distance then the humble human scientist should accept that.

In the example Dr H presents the measurement at A determines what happens at distance at B. Something often left out of this discussion is that one cannot measure the wave function directly, one can only measure the expectation values of physical variables. In the treatments of the EPR experiment the spin states of the two particles are emphasized and the spatial dependence of the wave function is swept under the rug. That is also the case in this video.

I find the Copenhagen interpretation the most useful for interpretation of experimental results. In it, once a measurement is made, the wave function is reinitialized in the measured state. Since the spatial part of the wave function joins the two particles and their spins it seems to me there is no "spooky action at a distance" at all. Make a measurement here and the wave function changes everywhere. There is no signaling involved since the wave function is not observable.

Experiments based on Bell's Theorem do not rule out the views I prefer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_ ... xperiments

What is powerful about Bell's theorem is that it doesn't refer to any particular theory of local hidden variables. It shows that nature violates the most general assumptions behind classical pictures, not just details of some particular models. No combination of local deterministic and local random hidden variables can reproduce the phenomena predicted by quantum mechanics and repeatedly observed in experiments.

[turboscrew]

I've been under the impression, that Einstein's opinion was that, even if statistical theories are good, they shouldn't be the "final" theories. The uncertainties of results should be due to uncertainties of the initial values alone:
“God does not play dice with the universe”

[notFritzArgelander]

I've been under the impression, that Einstein's opinion was that, even if statistical theories are good, they shouldn't be the "final" theories. The uncertainties of results should be due to uncertainties of the initial values alone:
“God does not play dice with the universe”

Yep. However, Nature does not care about the opinions of humans, it would seem.

[goldstar]

Yep. However, Nature does not care about the opinions of humans, it would seem.
[/quote]

I would also say that these days, in many cases, that the opinions of humans do not care about the opinions of nature....

[notFritzArgelander]

Yep. However, Nature does not care about the opinions of humans, it would seem.

I would also say that these days, in many cases, that the opinions of humans do not care about the opinions of nature....
[/quote]

Yes. Indeed. It’s one sign of the decay of civilization, sadly.