
#1
Dec403, 01:27 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,538

For context I'm looking at:
http://www.mtnmath.com/whatrh/node80.html Bell's theorem suggests that a hidden variable λ cannot exist, but, at least the version above makes the assumption that Λ (the set of all posible values of λ ) is a measurable domain s.t. [tex]\int_{\Lambda} f(\lambda)d\lambda[/tex] is welldefined. Is there a version of Bell's theorem that does not rely on the ability to integrate the probability function of λ? 



#2
Dec403, 05:46 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,538

Found it. Apparently Bell does assume that the hidden variable is in a measurable domain, and Pitowksy produced a model based on unmeasurable sets that avoids the issue.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Bell's Theorem  Advanced Physics Homework  2  
Fun question RE: Bell's Theorem  Quantum Physics  50  
Why Bell's Theorem is wrong.  Quantum Physics  9  
Intro to Bell's Theorem  Quantum Physics  1  
Bell's theorem  General Physics  27 