Is action at a distance possible as envisaged by the EPR Paradox.

[naturale]

You’re welcome naturale. I’ll check out 'your' paper ASAP.

I bet that you will be strongly impressed if you try to really understand it carefully. My recommendation is to first read it focalizing your attention on the formal demonstrations (energy quantization, relativistic causality, path integral, commutation relation, ...). Once that you have checked its formal consistence you can finally try to figure out the conceptual implications (the notion of time, determinism, ...).

If you want to discuss about that paper you can use https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=424579".

bests

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Great, thanks for info and the link naturale!

Cheers!

 

[charlylebeaugosse]

More on EACP elsewhere in the Forum: the fact that teh EACP is amost obvioulsy true is PRECISELY what makes it such a good hypothsis (if one can prove anything with it): in paticular, it allows to disqualify locality, something that Hawking takes as granted in the above quote, but that Penrose (less known from the public, but better (or equally) appreciated by the experts) takes as false. Bell "only" proved:
"locality and realism" (or "locality and HVs") false. Now Hawking views on Einstein's view are personal: he is a great scientist, not an historian. See Fine and Jammer for more documented opinions.