3 ms·

how do you expect to implement the "as-yet-undiscovered pseudorandom number generator" without any state ("hidden variables")?

• Xcelerate 14y ago
  I'm just an engineer, so I'm not actually trying to challenge accepted thinking. However, it is well known that any QM system can be simulated using a classical computer, with the penalty of exponential slowdown. Let's say that I have a hypothetical, ultra-powerful classical computer and I want to simulate a gigantic system of particles including aggregates of particles (e.g. people) performing measurements of other particles. When it comes time to determine the particular values for these measurements, I must generate a random number from a Gaussian distribution. So I use something like the Mersenne Twister. From the perspective of the simulated people, their observations would entirely match our own observations in studying a quantum system. tl,dr: state isn't necessarily a one particle concept or a local concept. Individual particles have their own properties (spin, charge, etc.) and then maybe a collection of a million particles also has unique properties. But my proposal is basically superdeterminism, which -- while being a loophole that has yet to be ruled out -- is unpopular. Since I'm not sure why, I guess I would need to get a degree in theoretical physics to find out.
  • deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  • deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]