Mermin on "Spooky action at a distance" Hi all. I've read Mermin's article on EPR and non-locality: www.physics.iitm.ac.in/~arvind/ph350/mermin.pdf I don't understand what he write on page 12: "Did the particle at A have its 3-color prior to the measurement of the 3-color of the particle at B? The answer cannot be yes, because, prior to the measurement of the 3-color at B, it is altogether possible that the roll of the dice at B or the whim of the B-operator will result in the 2-color or the 1-color being measured at B instead. Barring the most paranoid of conspiracy theories, “prior to the measurement of the 3-color at B” is indistinguishable from “prior to the measurement of the 2- (or 1-) color at B”. If the 3-color already existed, so also must the 2- and 1-colors have existed. But instruction sets (which consist of a specification of the 1-, 2-, and 3-colors) do not exist." If our detector is set to position 3, it measures if our particle has that property "3". We know that the particles do not carry instruction sets, but surely the particles know what state they are in. So if e.g. particles with property "2" are sent out and the detectors are both at position 3, then we get red at both detectors. But where does his explanation come into this?