Login Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables?
#4
(05-19-2016, 09:49 PM)John Duffield Wrote: No, Einstein's ether isn't much to do with do with dBB and quantum hidden variables, but take a look at Travis Norsen's paper http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.0401 : "Many textbooks and commentators report that Bell's theorem refutes the possibility (suggested especially by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen in 1935) of supplementing ordinary quantum theory with additional ("hidden") variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer-independent reality. On this view, Bell's theorem supports the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation. Bell's own view of his theorem, however, was quite different..." As for how different, I don't know, but I see this, and I wonder: "It may well be that a relativistic version  of [quantum] theory, while Lorentz invariant and local at the observational level, may be necessarily non-local and with a preferred frame (or aether) at the fundamental level".  

A very good article from Travis Norsen. He is, in my humble opinion, one of the best writers about the EPR-Bell question.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables? - by Schmelzer - 05-21-2016, 09:34 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)