The discussion revolves around the separability of the joint-state of measuring instruments used by Alice and Bob in a thought experiment, particularly in the context of counterfactual definiteness (CFD) and its implications for quantum mechanics. Participants explore theoretical conditions under which these concepts might hold true, as well as the potential nonlocality and dependencies between outcomes.
Participants express differing views on the implications of separability and CFD, with no consensus reached on whether the proposed conditions are sufficient or valid in the context of quantum mechanics. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between these concepts.
Limitations include the dependence on interpretations of quantum mechanics and the assumptions underlying the proposed conditions, particularly concerning free choice and the nature of measurement outcomes.
Bob's fixing of setting is spacelike separated from Alice's registration of outcome, and vice versa.ueit said:OK, let the two subsystems be an electron (X) and a proton (Y). How would you make them space like separated? As far as I can tell space like separation refers to events, not to physical systems that are more or less eternal.
But Bob's (free) choice of setting is spacelike separated from the registration of Alice's outcome, so just what kind of 'interaction' could possibly establish such a dependency?ueit said:As you said, in any classical theory condition 1 holds true. On the other hand if the subsystems X and Y interact with each other (and virtually all matter interacts electromagnetically and gravitationaly) condition 2 seems false.
Each of the instruments (in and of itself) can, for the sake of making the argument, be regarded as a classical object altogether.Eye_in_the_Sky said:1) The joint-system composed of the measuring instruments of Alice and Bob is a separable system.
(Thus, the relationship that the two instruments share in spacetime is a relationship of classical objects.)
Eye_in_the_Sky said:Bob's fixing of setting is spacelike separated from Alice's registration of outcome, and vice versa.
_____
But Bob's (free) choice of setting is spacelike separated from the registration of Alice's outcome, so just what kind of 'interaction' could possibly establish such a dependency?
I should not have included "free choice" in the ASIDE.
Let the ASIDE be restricted to conditions 2,3,4 only.
I agree.ueit said:what is your take on my observation:
"As far as I can tell your condition 1 (free choice) has no justification in any theory, classical or quantum."
I do not think it is a 'mechanism'. I think it is a 'soul' and that the 'soul' has a character which is out of the scope of any of the known "physics" of today. I would like to believe that there is a subject matter which, in a very deep way, is somehow like 'physics' and is also somehow about the 'soul', but I have no idea what that could be.I am especially interested in what mechanism do you think is responsable for the property of free choice so that we can asses if it is compatible with the classical theory that you intend to test.
Eye_in_the_Sky said:I agree.
I do not think it is a 'mechanism'. I think it is a 'soul' and that the 'soul' has a character which is out of the scope of any of the known "physics" of today. I would like to believe that there is a subject matter which, in a very deep way, is somehow like 'physics' and is also somehow about the 'soul', but I have no idea what that could be.