More realistic fundamentals: quantum theory from one premiss. by Gordon Watson

Gordon Watson

Thanks Juan,

Let me rephrase my position in your terms: Locality is confirmed by experiment; it is a consequence of our universe containing independent components which are correlated (eg, in EPRB, paired-particles are correlated by the conservation of angular momentum). Without any reference to (nor use of) nonlocality (nor nonlocal interaction-energy) -- and consistent with SR -- we can therefore calculate the correlation that will be revealed when such particle-pairs are tested by Alice and Bob. Experiments [will/do] confirm our calculations: to thus resolve Bell's AAD dilemma and confirm the "silliness" (of his and his follower's position) that Bell foreshadowed (as late as 1990). QED.

I will welcome you comments on ¶13 in my essay: there you will see Bell's theorem refuted.

HTH; with my thanks again, Gordon

Ian Durham

I left you a brief reply over on the forum for my essay.

Gordon Watson

From Ian Durham. Mar. 16, 2018.

Hi Gordon,

I will have to read your essay, but I will say that you can't really "refute" Bell's theorem. It's just a theorem. What you seem to be presenting is an alternate view, i.e. that Bell's derivation of his inequalities used a certain set of conditions that you think does not capture all of reality. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that, but that doesn't mean Bell was necessarily wrong either.

Anyway, I will try to get to reading your essay soon.

Ian

Thank you Ian, I look forward to your response; Gordon. Jul. 4, 2018.

« Previous Page