Login Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables?
#2
Dear Schmelzer, I would like to react with a question I've asked myself for long.

Let us imagine that the universe was immerged in a constantly-changing-random number, called X, complex number of the form exp(i. theta).

Now let us imagine that a physical property, say vertical polarization of 2 photons, could be initially bound so that their wavefunctions are equal to (X) and (-X).

Lately, say that measuring the vertical polarization of the particle, anywhere, anytime, would really mean to measure the X parameter. That would be, to bind the measurement instrument and everything around, to the still-everchanging-value of X. Same for the second measurement on the second particle.


We would have a X-depending, continuum universe containing all possibilities of consequences of both measurements. If such consequences are incompatible with the preservation of quantum coherence, X would "have to fall to a fixed value" as well as Higgs boson fell to a fixed value in the whole universe. This would propagate at the speed of light and finally resolve. Hopefully (but we don't know how).

It could create a conflict with another measurement, from the other particle, and this conflict would have to end to only one value of X ; thus, to "reverse time" of what had "started to happen" (this is hard to imagine). Though it's the same process for the Higgs boson whose final value is fixed and constant everywhere. But really, this would not mean to reverse time, only to throw away a macroscopic possibility so that the coherence of the X value can be resolved.

Of course lots and lots of "variables" would be necessary to allow this process in the world. Is it so scary ?

Then it should also be scary, that when you detect a 13-billion-year old photon, a whole 13-billion-lightyear-radius sphere "switches immediately" from the state of "maybe the photon is here" to "no photon left", this happens for every photon ever absorbed since the holy creation of light.

So. In conclusion we could state :
- Causality is respected in such process
- Polarization is not a hidden variable
- The speed of light is not violated
- That there is no need for nonlocality, (NB : did someone try to prove that GR forbids this sort of "uniform scalar 3D wormhole" ?)


But somewhere in the universe, there could be a Shrödinger's cat being at the same time dead and alive in a box, as a situation that nobody could ever notice without being himself as "seeing a dead cat while also seeing a living cat" until the universe, with all the time it needs at speed of light, resolves this in a Higgs-like process, and avoids us to believe in a quantum multiverse idea...

Where am I wrong ?
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables? - by c_cool_la_vie - 05-18-2016, 03:25 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)