Login Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables?
FrediFizzx: That quote was me, not Tom.

Sorry

FrediFizzx: There is no "collapse of the wave function" problem in EPR. That is a very common misconception.

I've never even heard of this misconception, and it's hard to believe it's common. I'm somewhat curious why anyone would think it was a problem? ... but it's not really worth going into.

FrediFizzx: We know what the explanation is for the "new" phenomena; space has unique spinor properties.

Ok, but this is a vague statement. Please give a reference explaining what space having "unique spinor properties" has to do with Bell's theorem.

Thomas Ray: ... Karl Hess ...

You mentioned that Hess paper a while ago, didn't seem convincing, perhaps I should look at it again
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables? - by secur - 07-24-2016, 01:12 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)