- #1
- 10,761
- 3,616
Hi All
I am a bit exasperated right now. On another forum a person claimed Bell's second theorem proved QM was not local. I carefully explained what local causality was, and what the theorem states: There exist quantum phenomena for which there is no theory satisfying local causality.
It of course is true - but the person simply did not get the reason it failed - namely for local causality to be applicable the particles need to be factorizeable - and that precisely is what many interpretations reject for entangled systems.
Have I got something wrong?
Thanks
Bill
I am a bit exasperated right now. On another forum a person claimed Bell's second theorem proved QM was not local. I carefully explained what local causality was, and what the theorem states: There exist quantum phenomena for which there is no theory satisfying local causality.
It of course is true - but the person simply did not get the reason it failed - namely for local causality to be applicable the particles need to be factorizeable - and that precisely is what many interpretations reject for entangled systems.
Have I got something wrong?
Thanks
Bill