I In Bell's Theorem, communication

ndvcxk123
Messages
47
Reaction score
3
TL;DR Summary
i.e., excluded in Bell's circuit is only an unknown precondition at splitting time that would bias the spin toward an examined value.
If correct, as non-physicist, I wonder why the vast jump to "spooky action" is seen as more plausible as some new type of particle faster than the speed of light. Consider the time long before the discovery of radio communication, how weird it must have been to theorize about that. The speed of light limit extends here to even unknown objects, perhaps ones smaller, lighter than photons, and confidence in this limit is so high that we completely change our conception of cause and effect. Gravity does tug at photons, but only at light speed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ndvcxk123 said:
The speed of light limit extends here to even unknown objects, perhaps ones smaller, lighter than photons, and confidence in this limit is so high that we completely change our conception of cause and effect.
You have it backwards. It is any violation of the light speed limit that would require us to completely change our conception of cause and effect, and that is why we are so reluctant to accept explanations based on violation of that limit.

FTL communication creates the possibility that effects appear before causes and even that a message might be received before it is sent - and that the recipient of the message is then able to stop the message from being sent if and only if it has been received. These possibilities are utterly incompatible with our conception of cause and effect.

You might want to Google for “tachyonic anti-telephone” to get a sense of some of the difficulties.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top