Quantum Physics and the End of Reality by Sabine Hossenfelder and Carlo Rovelli

Georgina Woodward

Different measurement options can be used.

True. But, in some circumstances, it is a very bad idea, to ever actually use them; because, unfortunately, there are common circumstances, in the real world, for which, it has been proven (by Shannon) that doing so, will inevitably cause frequent, gross errors, in the "measurement outcomes." In other words, all such measurements will be garbage.

'measurement' has the potential to produce different outcome states corresponding to the orientation of apparatus used

True. But many of those 'measurements' are guaranteed to be garbage; by which, I mean, specifically, that the 'measurements' imply that something is 'true', even though it is actually known to be 'false', a priori.

I have spent my time considering the kind of metaphysics needed to understand reality as it exists and reality as it is measured and observed.

It is time for you to seriously consider the metaphysical fact, that trying to understand Reality, by deducing valid conclusions, from measurements indicating that 'what is true' is actually 'false', is an exercise in futility. Everyone, including you, must first learn how to avoid ever making any such totally misleading 'measurements.' And the only known way to do that, is to employ the astounding, mind-boogling, breathtaking method discovered by Shannon; avoid ever making any 'measurements' at all!!!! - do something else entirely - something that is guaranteed to eliminate all the garbage (bit errors) from the "observation outcomes.' The 'Measurement Problem' will simply cease to exist, the very instant, that one ceases to ever make or employ another 'measurement!'

What were you trying to show with the astronauts and coin?

That is the situation involved in every Bell Test. Every Bell Test, in effect, is trying to 'measure' the true state, of dirty, worn-down 'coins', that are frequently being observed from a nearly edge-on angle. It is impossible to correctly 'determine', the state, under such circumstances. All the supposedly 'weird' correlations, are entirely caused by all the resulting garbage 'measurement outcomes.' That is not an idle, metaphysical speculation. It is a proven, reproducible fact, in the classical realm. In the classical realm, it is known, a priori, what the 'true' state is, because the objects being measured, were created in a known state. But the frequent, garbage measurements of those objects, nonetheless, yield the completely opposite state! When all those, easily identified, garbage measurements (bit errors) are eliminated from the subsequent correlation analysis, the 'weird', 'quantum' correlations vanish.

Garbage in, garbage out: that is "Quantum Reality."

Robert McEachern Thank you for that comprehensive reply. I know where you are coming from.
Re metaphysical speculation. I 'd argue its more than speculation,. There is hard evidence ;

1. that objects emit what we call electromagnetic radiation, when illuminated. We can demonstrate it using a light meter.
2. Eye photoreceptors and device photo cells absorb and respond tot he absorbed EM radiation.
   Chemical change can be detected.
   3.Each observer receives a different subset of EM emitted or reflected into the environment by the object. Easily demonstrated using an object seen to be different colours.
   4.A device acting as observer. such as a digital camera can be shown to generate a semblance that corresponds to the input received. How the cameras work is technically understood by the manufacturers as well as experienced by people daily.
   5.To provide multiple views an object must exist not just as seen by one observer but as source of sensory stimuli allowing all possible views. So, space in which things exist rather than observation products are seen must be absolute not 3d, as all observation viewpoints are valid,
   6.it is reasonable that quantum objects, like macroscopic objects unseen have existence in the environment filling absolute space . The quantum objects become known by detection or measurement that forms a singular ,relative ' seen this way' outcome state product. The moon object exists even when an observation product isn't formed by a particular observer, so they don't see it.

Georgina Woodward

I'd argue its more than speculation

So would I.

But I would further argue, that the reason philosophers and physicists alike, have all failed to comprehend the true nature of reality, is because they all have assumed that the entire physical world (except perhaps for conscious beings), must be behaving physically, in response to any "observation products" or "Laws of Nature", rather than behaving symbolically.

But that assumption appears to be incorrect - not just for conscious beings, but even for elementary particles!

Because Shannon discovered that even inanimate objects, can be made to behave much less chaotically and much more deterministically, if they behave symbolically. And Mother Nature appears to have discovered that same principle of operation, eons before Shannon ever did.

But most interesting of all, Shannon realized that the symbolic "alphabet", that must be used to generate any truly-deterministic cause and effect behaviors, is an "alphabet" consisting entirely of "White Noise." - one of the very things that causes the "Measurement Problem." Fighting fire, with fire:

Pure Order, emerging from Pure Chaos! Who would have guessed?

Georgina Woodward
That is correct, as far as it goes. But it does not go nearly far enough: the "existing particles condition", at the heart of the problem, is a very specific condition, concerning exactly how "identical" the particle pairs really are. As it turns out, "identical" twins behave very differently than "fraternal" twins, in Bell Tests of the EPR Paradox; resulting in precisely the difference observed, between "classical" and "quantum" correlations.

Georgina Woodward

determining their absolute , unmeasured trajectories through absolute space

That is irrelevant to a Bell test. In a Bell test, the two basketballs would always be fired along the exact same, known trajectory, in exactly opposite directions.

The whole point of the tests, is that the two Basketballs are also spinning - in exactly opposite, but unknown, random orientations. Your job, is to determine the unknown orientation of each ball's spin axis (either "up" or "down"), in 3 dimensional space, and then correlate one ball's orientation measurements, against the other ball's orientation measurements. The whole point of the test, is to demonstrate that "quantum" objects, will not exhibit the same correlations, that basketballs do.

My point is: Basketballs are not the only type of "classical" objects existing in our universe. Coins also exist. And if some coins are "manufactured" in accordance with Shannon's peculiar recipe, for one single-bit-of-information, then unlike basketballs, those coins will exhibit the same correlations as "quantum" objects.

Robert McEachern
Sorry again for being ambiguous and unclear. I wasn't trying to replicate a Bell test.
I've set up the thought experiment so trajectory, relative to position of detectors, can be adjusted. The particle source could be fixed and the detectors moved instead ,to get the same effect. I think I need to show that even though the outcome states are only manifest upon production they are nevertheless correlated.
A certain gentleman always wears odd socks ,one blue one red. Gifting him such a pairing: if the first parcel arrives with red sock inside, the parcel containing the other must have a blue sock inside. The socks are existing things. Like cakes from the same batch and recipe exist, a caterpillar grown fat and leaf exist, similar existing injuries from same dangerous existing obstacle .We could instead send a parcel containing a card saying basketball score for device 1. The other will be the score for device 2. Even not yet manifest they are necessarily correlated. But not entangled. Neither score knows anything of the other, before or after manifestation, and is not choosing anything.

Georgina Woodward

I wasn't trying to replicate a Bell test.

And therein lies the problem. If you do not replicate the effect, observed in a Bell test, then you almost certainly have not replicated (or identified) the cause for the effect, either.

A certain gentleman always wears odd socks ,one blue one red...

Physicists already understand why Bertlmann’s socks "are necessarily correlated. But not entangled." Hence, they have no further interest in such experiments. But the correlations observed in Bell tests are different. The only question of any on-going interest is, why? What causes "quantum" objects to correlate in ways, that are totally unlike Bertlmann’s socks, or any other previously known, "classical" system?

And my answer is:
"it is easy to demonstrate that the cause of "Bell correlations" is entirely due to the "non-identicality" of the entangled pairs, rather than any supposed "non-locality" of the real world, in which those entangled pairs actually exist."