4 ms·
"If statistical independence is violated, this means that what a quantum particle does depends on what you measure." But in standard QM without superdetermini
by meroes 5y ago
"If statistical independence is violated, this means that what a quantum particle does depends on what you measure."
But in standard QM without superdeterminism, what a particle does already depends what you (i.e. the experimenters) measure - how you set the relative angles of your detectors determines the amount of correlation, even when setting them at spacelike distances after the entangled pair is released (say Alice chooses hers and Bob his without any communication between them.
It's the same physical facts and we either take superdeterminism or quantum nonlocality (or other interpretations not at issue here). To me the conspiracy of superdeterminism is too great.
- mrjangles 5y agoYeah this seems like yet another attempt by someone to use different words to explain the exact same quantum theory we have always been using, then trying to claim because they used different words they somehow came up with a special new theory.
- naasking 5y agoWhat you describe is "quantum contextuality". What Sabine is saying is that so-called superdeterminism/giving up statistical independence implies the contextuality that is needed to explain quantum mechanics using hidden variables, and it does so in a simple way if we accept future input dependence.