4 ms·

I can't get past the paywall, but I'd be curious to know what his solution to the violation of the Bell inequality is.

lupire 4y ago
"Counterfactual Fractal Geometry" , so Bell's inequality only applies in a reality that is different from our true reality. > We have to suppose that the whole universe, and literally everything there is in it, is collectively a chaotic system evolving precisely on some cosmic fractal geometry. " I guess one way of trying to make it make sense is that he believes in global hidden variables (non-locality), which reduces physics to "things are exactly this kind of weird because all the complexity of the universe is encoded in one giant number present at the big bang that is available to every particle forever.
EGreg 4y ago
He explains it in the article. Questioning one of the assumptions in the Bell theorems
- naasking 4y ago
  Indeed, he's on the superdeterminism train with Sabine Hossenfelder: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2020.00139/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2020.00139...
  - fsh 4y ago
    I am not aware of any superdeterministic theory that can explain the violation of Bell's inequality. They only argue that a violation of Bell's inequality is not impossible in a superdeterministic local hidden variable theory (but no such theory has been formulated). I suspect this is why Hossenfelder just knocks down a few strawmen in her video on superdeterminism [1], instead of addressing the elephant in the room (experimental violations of Bell's inequality). [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytyjgIyegDI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytyjgIyegDI
    - naasking 4y ago
      Of course there are: * Hossenfelder's own toy model, https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.01327v5 https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.01327v5 * Gerard 't Hooft's cellular automata model: https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gthpub/FFP11_2010.pdf https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gthpub/FFP11_2010.p... * https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/714819 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/714819 Models that violate Bell's theorem are in fact simple to construct. Everyone agrees that superdeterminism can evade Bell's theorem, the key is making this evasion as plausible or more plausible than accepting many worlds or the absence of counterfactual definiteness. Given so little effort has been expended in this direction because of incorrect assumptions of superdeterminism, it's not surprising that these models are still rudimentary proofs of concept, but the notion that Bells' theorem is some insurmountable obstacle is just incorrect.
    - rafaelero 4y ago
      Accepting the very simple assertion that the thing being measured is not independent from the act of measurement already renders the bell inequality invalid.
bookofjoe 4y ago
https://archive.ph/6kaJc https://archive.ph/6kaJc

"Counterfactual Fractal Geometry" , so Bell's inequality only applies in a reality that is different from our true reality. > We have to suppose that the whole universe, and literally everything there is in it, is collectively a chaotic system evolving precisely on some cosmic fractal geometry. " I guess one way of trying to make it make sense is that he believes in global hidden variables (non-locality), which reduces physics to "things are exactly this kind of weird because all the complexity of the universe is encoded in one giant number present at the big bang that is available to every particle forever.

EGreg 4y ago

He explains it in the article. Questioning one of the assumptions in the Bell theorems

naasking 4y ago
Indeed, he's on the superdeterminism train with Sabine Hossenfelder: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2020.00139/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2020.00139...
- fsh 4y ago
  I am not aware of any superdeterministic theory that can explain the violation of Bell's inequality. They only argue that a violation of Bell's inequality is not impossible in a superdeterministic local hidden variable theory (but no such theory has been formulated). I suspect this is why Hossenfelder just knocks down a few strawmen in her video on superdeterminism [1], instead of addressing the elephant in the room (experimental violations of Bell's inequality). [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytyjgIyegDI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytyjgIyegDI
  - naasking 4y ago
    Of course there are: * Hossenfelder's own toy model, https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.01327v5 https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.01327v5 * Gerard 't Hooft's cellular automata model: https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gthpub/FFP11_2010.pdf https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gthpub/FFP11_2010.p... * https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/714819 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/714819 Models that violate Bell's theorem are in fact simple to construct. Everyone agrees that superdeterminism can evade Bell's theorem, the key is making this evasion as plausible or more plausible than accepting many worlds or the absence of counterfactual definiteness. Given so little effort has been expended in this direction because of incorrect assumptions of superdeterminism, it's not surprising that these models are still rudimentary proofs of concept, but the notion that Bells' theorem is some insurmountable obstacle is just incorrect.
  - rafaelero 4y ago
    Accepting the very simple assertion that the thing being measured is not independent from the act of measurement already renders the bell inequality invalid.

bookofjoe 4y ago

https://archive.ph/6kaJc https://archive.ph/6kaJc