REF: Smolin; Perimeter Institute; -- “The case for background independence” What does background independence mean. Are statistical probabilities needed to compare separated events. If the background that physics works on varies relative to distant locations in GR does that mean GR is indeterminate? For example: Two particles starting out from the same place separate at relativistic speeds and approach separate black holes at escape speed, remain outside the horizon and use the curve in space-time to change direction by about 120 degrees putting them on courses that should bring them back together at a point some distance from their start. With mass speeds and locations of all elements well defined, GR should be able to calculate the exact initial trajectories needed to effect a collision. However, background independence between the two, should not allow us to determine a correct relative relationship between the two reference frames associated with the two approaching particles. That is; by using an independent background GR to calculate the speed and location of the other particle, relative to the new local reference frame of one particle used as reference; we can only predict within a range of some statistical probability the exact speed and location of that other particle as it comes back into observable local proximity of our selected reference particle. Leaving us unable to reliably predict or even guide our local into a collision without making current local observations of the other approaching particle. Meaning an element of chaos or uncertainty within the theory is involved. If Smolin is correct about an independent background GR, this directly implies that GR is also indeterminate. And in that sense this would mean GR in also classically non-local. That is even GR does not require ‘Bell local causality’ and therefore is a theory that could be compatible with the experiment proofs of Aspect, and others, that so far show a viable theory would need to be non-local. I’ve done the best I can to understand background independence and this seems a logical conclusion to me. Does someone know; is this Smolin view of GR non-local? Or if my logic above needs correcting, comments please. BUT in layman’s classical terms, please. NOT in some redefinition of “local” derived from some other theory. I’d rather this thread not degenerate into another argument about how which non-local theory is correct and better than other non-local theories. Those posts should start a new thread in the quantum forum anyway so redirect us to one there if it is important. That way maybe this thread can remain focused on; do some views of GR define it as Non-Local?