- #1

msumm21

- 218

- 16

- TL;DR Summary
- Trying to understand things I read in other posts about correlation like EPR-Bell

I'm trying to understand the comment by bhobba below from another thread. A related followup from RUTA is provided for reference. After reviewing these I still don't understand. If I think in terms of a single-world (not Everette) and assume Alice and Bob are free to adjust their SG measurement orientation at will (not predetermined), then is there another way to understand these correlations (with needing non-local influence)?

Comment: I'm not saying many-worlds or determinism are wrong, just saying IF they are wrong then ...

Comment: I'm not saying many-worlds or determinism are wrong, just saying IF they are wrong then ...

bhobba said:There is no proof of non-locality in QM. All Bell, and its experimental confirmation, shows is a non-classical statistical correlation. What it means is simply QM is not a classical probability model - its a generalized probability model. Want it to be one - then you need non-local influences. But the world may simply not be classical in its statistical behavior - it does not have to be non-local.

RUTA said:Here is an explanation suitable for anyone who knows intro physics: https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08231. In fact, I had several of my Honors students in intro physics read and comment on it before posting. Here is a generalized version just published in Entropy: https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/21/7/692/pdf. Here is the talk I gave on that paper: which is pretty basic.

The bottom line in all these is that contrary to popular myth, QM and SR are self-consistent as they are ultimately based on the same principle — no preferred reference frame. This explains the one difference between the quantum and classical joint distributions per Garg and Mermin (see citation in either paper), i.e., that Bob and Alice both always measure +1/-1 regardless of their reference frame. That fact alone then accounts for the “weird” QM correlation just like the light postulate accounts for the “weird” relativity of simultaneity in SR. In other words, what people find so weird about modern physics is due to the fact that no one’s sense experiences can provide a favored perspective on the real external world (to borrow from Einstein). Specifically here wrt the measurements of fundamental constants (c and h).