News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by lisper on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @09:36PM (#27901321)
> It's a statement of the Everett/relative state/many worlds interpretation

No, it isn't. I've said nothing about many-worlds, only reversibility. And on that point everyone agrees.

> Now it's dinner time, you don't believe that

You really need to read the link above. It goes into all that in great detail. But the TL;DR here is that if it's dinner time, you haven't actually reversed the measurement, notwithstanding your current mental state with respect to the photon.

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by thisrod on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @11:18PM (#27901979)
> You really need to read the link above

I don't like claims to authority, but maybe you should read the papers I've published about Bell inequalities too? :-p

It sounds like you're saying that, in principle, physical processes are all reversible. (Although that is often thermodynamically impossible in practice.) You're also saying that it's impossible in principle for someone to learn the result of a measurement in the morning, then unlearn it when the measurement is reversed during the afternoon. I don't see how there could be a self-consistent interpretation of quantum measurement where both those things are true.

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by lisper on Wednesday July 21, 2021 @01:11AM (#27902552)
> maybe you should read the papers I've published

How am I supposed to do that? You haven't provided and references and your profile is empty.

> in principle, physical processes are all reversible

Correct. This is a straightforward mathematical property of the Schroedinger equation.

> it's impossible in principle for someone to learn the result of a measurement in the morning, then unlearn it when the measurement is reversed during the afternoon

That's right. But that's not because it's impossible to reverse the measurement. It's because when you reverse a measurement you don't just "unlearn" the result.

You really should read the reference I gave you.