Is Lambda in Bell's Ansatz a Parameter for Many-Worlds Interpretation?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jk22
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the parameter lambda in Bell's Ansatz, particularly in the context of the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of Bell's theorem on non-locality and its relationship with different interpretations of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that lambda could represent the angle of polarization of a photon arriving at measurement A.
  • Another participant suggests that lambda might be interpreted as the coordinate of the universe in which the measurement result is A, linking it to a Many-Worlds perspective.
  • There is a question about whether Bell's theorem implies that non-local formulas are still necessary to reproduce quantum results within MWI, suggesting that MWI does not resolve the issue of non-locality.
  • A participant argues that while the predictions of quantum mechanics cannot be explained by any non-local and realistic theory, this does not imply there is an "issue" to resolve regarding non-locality.
  • Another participant highlights that all interpretations yield the same predictions, leading to the assertion that no interpretation can explain or eliminate non-locality.
  • A question is raised about whether non-locality should be considered a prediction or an interpretation, indicating a lack of consensus among experts.
  • A participant references a preprint related to the discussion, suggesting that locality is preserved in the context discussed, but questions whether this preservation comes at the cost of reality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of Bell's theorem for MWI and non-locality, indicating that multiple competing interpretations exist without a clear consensus on the matter.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the dependence on interpretations of quantum mechanics and the lack of agreement on the nature of non-locality, highlighting the complexity of the discussion.

jk22
Messages
732
Reaction score
25
Bell writes for the result of measurement in A $$A (\theta_A,\lambda) $$.

It is said lambda could be any parameter.

I would like to interprete lambda and thought of two possibilities :

-$$\lambda=\phi $$ the angle of polarization of the photon arriving at A. This seems reasonable

-since lambda could be any parameter it could be : the coordinate of the universe in which result is A for the measurement setting given. Hence a many-worlds view.

Thus can we deduce from Bell theorem that if one wants to reproduce quantum results with MWI it should still use nonlocal formulas ? Hence MWI does not solve the nonlocality issue ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jk22 said:
Thus can we deduce from Bell theorem that if one wants to reproduce quantum results with MWI it should still use nonlocal formulas ? Hence MWI does not solve the nonlocality issue ?

It's not clear what you mean by "solve the non-locality issue". It is a fact that the predictions of quantum mechanics cannot be explained by any non-local and realistic theory, but that doesn't mean that there's any "issue" to "solve". It means that if we believe the experiments that support the predictions of quantum mechanics we don't have to spend time considering hypothetical local realistic theories to explain QM.

All interpretations make the same predictions, so no interpretation can either explain or eliminate non-locality. All you can ever get from an interpretation is a more-or-less palatable way of thinking about the mathematical machinery that makes these predictions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
Nugatory said:
All interpretations make the same predictions, so no interpretation can either explain or eliminate non-locality.
Would you say that non-locality is a prediction or an interpretation?
I think there is no true consensus among experts.
 
Reading the paper it appears that locality is preserved (since the measurement information must be transferred at c or less). However it is not still at the expense of reality?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Can Bell's theorem contradict PBR ?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Graduate Can entanglement be detected in a single Bell pair?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Is there another workable interpretation of the Bell Inequality?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Was Bell's hypothesis verified?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad Is Bell's Theorem Inconsistent with Quantum Mechanics?
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
8K
Undergrad Looking For Help Understanding Bell's Theorem, Hidden Variables & QM
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
8K
Graduate Is delayed choice remote entanglement of photons derived from TDSE?
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
Undergrad Bell's theorem claimed to be refuted - paper published by EPL
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
8K
Undergrad How do you understand EPR & Bell's Theorem?
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
Undergrad Influence on world's number and Bell's theorem
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K