- #26

atyy

Science Advisor

- 14,047

- 2,342

I think we agree since we both seem to like Landau and Lifshitz. :) I guess whenever you say "collapse" you mean "physical collapse", whereas I always mean "FAPP" unless I'm not talking about quantum mechanics, but something beyond the standard theory like GRW or CSL.That's exactly the point! There's no collapse in the minimal interpretation, and the quantum state is just a description of our (probabilistic!) knowledge about the system due to an equivalence class of prepartion procedures. This is the operational definition of what a quantum state is, which in the formalism is represented by the Statistical operator.

Maybe section VII.B and VII.C of the huge review by Brunner et al http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.2849. The contextuality or memory loophole is discussed in VII.B.3 under finite statistics (the Nieuwenhuizen paper is not mentioned, but the issue is).Concerning the tests of the Bell inequality and related theorems and the various loopholes and the current status of their experimental resolution: is there a good recent review article on this topic, so that I can get an overview first?