Login Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables?
Woops, you're right: that quote should have been ascribed to Deutsch; but since the two men's views are supposed to be the same, my error is not too severe.

I certainly don't present the post as authoritative. That blogger expressed my own views pretty well, that's all. I do think Deutsch is Popperian, as far as it goes, and that Popper "ignores the problem of choosing between alternative non-falsified theories and the matter of theory-ladenness of negative observations". That's a pretty good statement of "the problem with Popper". But if I want to defend it I definitely must argue from primary sources only - as you say. However I don't want to defend it - who cares what Popper thinks? Not me. So I'll concede whatever point you want to make about him - except that I'm a Popperian! It's conceivable that if I studied him better I'd realize that he agrees with me. If so, he's a securian. :-)

The fact that they had to grope their way to QM theory, like blind men with the elephant, doesn't make the founders incompetent. I'm saying any competent theorists could grope their way to the right theory in about the same time it took them, with about as much difficulty. Obviously that can only be an opinion, impossible to prove or disprove.

Give me a while and I'll analyze Bell as philosophy. However - having been trying - I find it's not quite as easy as I thought. So you're welcome to go first! Then I'll respond to your take on it. Otherwise, I accept the challenge; but it will take a day or two, I want to do this right. Unlike Popper, this is a topic I do care about.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables? - by secur - 09-06-2016, 10:04 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)