3 ms·
> Our observation of a loophole-free Bell inequality violation thus rules out all local realist theories that accept that the number generators timely produce a
by effie 11y ago
> Our observation of a loophole-free
Bell inequality violation thus rules out all local realist theories that accept that the number generators timely produce a free random bit and that the outputs are final once recorded in the electronics.
Why should a local realist theory accept that? In determinism, there are no random events.
- n4r9 11y agoThis has been studied. The kind of determinism that a local realistic theory requires in order to explain Bell violations is generally regarded as absurd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism
- effie 11y agoBut that is just regular determinism; everything is determined by the prior state of the system, including the operation of the number generator and the experimenter's movements. As far as physics models go, I cannot see anything absurd about it.
- n4r9 11y agoSorry, I didn't word that very well. "Regular" determinism doesn't necessarily affect Bell's Theorem. All you need is that the measurement choices at each end are "effectively free for the purpose at hand". The kind of determinism you'd need to actually affect Bell's Theorem is a pathological, conspiratorial one in which the universe is well aware of which measurement choices you are going to make and just sets things up so that you'll get the same outcomes that quantum theory predicts. This is discussed in Section D of the following paper: http://www-e.uni-magdeburg.de/mertens/teaching/seminar/themen/AJP001261.pdf http://www-e.uni-magdeburg.de/mertens/teaching/seminar/theme...
- effie 11y agoThat's a very interesting paper, quite well written too. Thanks for the link.