- #1
guillefix
- 77
- 0
Hello, I was just wondering why do you need Bell's experiment to prove that there are no local hidden variables? If you do ANY experiment with the same initial conditions, and you don't get the same result, then it's clear the universe is not deterministic! is it not?
I guess you can say, how can you control the whole universe? But if you create a photon, then you just need to control the past light cone since the photon was created, which is considerably much easier.
I guess then tha Bohms theory suggest that what causes things to look underteminsitic is things outside this cone affecting the result.
Anyway, my question is that if any experiment would be valid for proving this, why is Bell's experiment all that important?
It seems to me that Bell's inequality experiment is just proving that the particles are correlated because the inequality assumes the particles are random (doesnt matter wether statistically or fundamentally) but uncorrelated, and thus it will be violated by particles that are correlated.
I guess you can say, how can you control the whole universe? But if you create a photon, then you just need to control the past light cone since the photon was created, which is considerably much easier.
I guess then tha Bohms theory suggest that what causes things to look underteminsitic is things outside this cone affecting the result.
Anyway, my question is that if any experiment would be valid for proving this, why is Bell's experiment all that important?
It seems to me that Bell's inequality experiment is just proving that the particles are correlated because the inequality assumes the particles are random (doesnt matter wether statistically or fundamentally) but uncorrelated, and thus it will be violated by particles that are correlated.