So, I was reading some philosophy tonight. I finished David Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding , which - at the end of a book with no abstract reasoning of quantity or number or really any experimental reasoning - has the following as the fina...
Okay, I am really sick and tired of reboots. I've reached my limit, and the idea that there might be a reboot of the classic Ghostbusters is enough to push me over the edge. For a while, there have been rumors of another sequel that introduced a new team. T...
There is something about Bell's Theorem that I don't understand.
As I understand it, Bell starts with Schrödinger's Wave Equation, which (as Schrödinger conceived it) applies to a single particle. Using Schrödinger's formulation, an observer can expect to find the particle at some location, (x,y,z), at some time, t, with the probability given by Schrödinger's formula.
In the EPR Paradox, instead of reckoning one particle, we are given a pair of twin particles sharing a common "birth certificate" going off in opposite directions from each other.
How are we to apply Schrödinger's Wave Equation, which applies to a single particle, to a pair of particles separated by arbitrary distances in space?
Bell blithely takes Schrödinger's Wave Equation and straightaway applies it to both particles, as if they comprised a "singlet" -- a system of two particles acting as if they were one particle.
But here is where I fall off the boat. There is but one parameter, t, for time in Schrödinger's Wave Equation. What is Bell supposed to plug in for "system time" for reckoning events (measurements) occurring at two different locations in space?!?
One of the first things we learn from Einstein's Relativity is that there is no such thing as "Universal Cosmological Time." Indeed there is no such thing as "simultaneity" for events taking place at separate locations.
It occurs to me that Bell is abusing Schrödinger's Wave Equation by extrapolating from the special case for which Schrödinger constructed his formula -- a single particle -- to embracing an arbitrary distributed system of particles.
How in the name of Schrödinger and Einstein does Bell get away with that?!?
Both Schrödinger and Einstein died before Bell constructed his Inequality. Had they been alive, I reckon both of them would have objected to extrapolating the Wave Equation to a distributed system, especially since doing so required the adoption of the unrealistic concept of a common "system time" to plug into Schrödinger's ad hoc formula.
It is instructive to consider two quotes here from Richard Feynman:
"Where did we get Schrödinger's wavefunction from? Nowhere. It is not possible to derive it from anything you know. It came out of the mind of Schrödinger."
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Moreover, Schrödinger was not entirely comfortable with the implications of quantum theory. Schrödinger wrote about the probability interpretation of quantum mechanics, saying: "I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it." I reckon he was worried someone would someday misapply it.
Nonetheless, Bell hypothesized that it was realistic to extrapolate Schrödinger's Wave Equation from the case of a single particle to the case of a distributed system, even though that created the dilemma of inventing the unrealistic concept of a unified "system time" that pervaded the cosmos. Was his hypothesis defensible? This is where Feynman's second quote comes into play.
Under the questionable hypothesis, Bell constructed an Inequality that was soon disconfirmed by Alain Aspect's experiments. That's not very surprising, and it means that the ad hoc single-particle Wave Equation cannot reasonably be extrapolated to a distributed system. In other words, Bell's Inequality is "inoperative" because it's constructed from an unrealistic assumption about the existence of a "universal system time" that extends throughout the cosmos.
Does anybody really know what time it is?
"Symbols of Religions". Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons Several recent atheist commentators have rightly condemned ISIS, citing it as an example of religion gone horribly wrong. But then they go further, usi...
First, let me say that I've done this before, back in 2008, so here's a link to that list (although please ignore all of the begging to join BookWise ... it was a clever book-oriented multi-level marketing system which, sadly, did not survive the digital a...
- The Philosopher's StoneOwner; Freelance writer/editor, 2001 - present
- CTB/McGraw-HillAssessment Editor, 2004 - present
- Wabash CollegePhysics, Mathematics, Philosophy, 1995 - 1999
- Indiana University-Purdue University IndianapolisM.S. Mathematics Education, 2005 - 2008
The Top 10 Relationship Words That Aren't Translatable Into English | Ma...
Big Think. Home; Special Series; Topics; Experts; Blogs; Ideafeed. Follow us. Like us on Facebook; Follow us on Twitter; LinkedIn; Subscribe
Andrew Zimmerman Jones - Official website of author Andrew Zimmerman Jon...
Network. Google+. Facebook Pages AZJ Author Page About.com Physics. Twitter @azjauthor @AboutPhysics @40DaysofGiving. Mailing Lists Google G
What the Bible says — and doesn’t say — about marriage – LGBTQ Nation
There’s a lot of talk about the biblical definition of marriage and the family; however, I can’t find where those terms are explained anywhe
Elder Sign: Felicia Day, Mike Morhaime, and Bill Prady join Wil on Table...
Want to play Elder Sign with your friends at home? Visit http://www.target.com or your local Target store to purchase it! And don't forget y
The Philosopher's Stone: 5 Lessons From Disney/Pixar's Brave
The new Disney/Pixar film Brave is a powerful film. The overall plotline has been masterfully unspoiled from the previews, though I was able
10 Things Parents Should Know About The Cabin In The Woods | GeekDad | W...
1. What’s it all about? It's not your standard college kids go out into the woods and are hunted by . This is Joss Whedon, so he's put a pro
A Teen’s Brave Response to “I’m Christian, Unless You’re Gay”
After getting a homework assignment to write an essay about I'm Christian, Unless You're Gay, one teenager decided that enough was enough...