NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/sci/physics/23373

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-24 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!mtnmath!paul
From: [e-mail] (Paul Budnik)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: hidden variables
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Jan 93 02:03:07 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mountain Math Software, P. O. Box 2124, Saratoga. CA 95070
Lines: 25

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dale Atems) writes:
>[...]
> I certainly do not agree that it is logically necessary for a theory
> to regard the violation of the mathematical relationship of Bell's
> inequality as due to information transfer. I agree only that it is a
> reasonable thing to require of a theory. If experiment shows that this
> transfer must be instantaneous, then I am inclined to reject the
> requirement.

First the issues is not just the violation of the mathematical relationship.
It is easy to construct local hidden variables models that violate the
relationship. You have to measure the timing involved i. e. the delay
between when polarizer angles change state and this has an observable
effect, if you want to rule out local hidden variable models.

I am confused by your statement. Eberhard proved that QM makes
predictions that require nonlocal effects or influence. The Relativistic
Schrodinger equation is local and Lorentz invariant. One cannot derive
such effects using that equation. Do you disagree with either of these
statements? If you do not then I think you are forced to the conclusion
that the collapse postulate must be the source of these non local
predictions. The only two laws that describe how the wave function
evolves are the Schrodinger equation and the collapse postulate.

Paul Budnik