Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2565

Re: The halting problem revisited

Show all headers | View raw

On Mar 29, 12:53 pm, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
> Joshua Maurice <joshuamaur...@gmail.com> writes:
> >Just because I'm marginally knowledgeable about such things,
> >let me pipe in.
> (...)
> >IIRC, there's also some discussion of whether Bell's inequality are
> >true. I'm not the most versed on it, but I think that the evidence for
> >Bell's inequality is less than foolproof.
>
>   Marginally knowledgeable people are aware that
>
>       every single experiment done so far (...) violates
>       a Bell inequality
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experiments
>
>   and
>
>       Aspect's experiments were considered to provide
>       overwhelming support to the thesis that Bell's
>       inequalities are violated
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Aspect
>
>   as it has to be when quantum theory is correct.

I mispoke. I meant "Bell's Theorem" instead of "inequality". Typo. My
mistake. I meant to say that Bell's Theorem is widely upheld to be
true, although the evidence isn't foolproof. It is exactly as you
state - all performed experiments seem to violate a Bell Inequality,
which is interpreted as proving no hidden determinalistic local
variable system which can describe the results.

As I mentioned, there are so called "loopholes" in the validity of
these experimental results, but the consensus leans towards validity.

Let me requote what you snipped.

On Mar 28, 6:15 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message <imr30v$vo...@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> > Heisenberg's uncertainty principle only states that we don't know the
> > (P)RNG of the world. :-)
>
> Bell’s inequality states otherwise.

As I said this is untrue. Bell's Theorem, if correct, and it's widely
believed to be correct, proves that there is no /local/
determinalistic hidden variable system consistent with observations of
quantum mechanics. However, there could be a non-local one. There
could be a non-local determinalistic hidden variable system which is
consistent with observations of quantum effects. Thus the perceived
randomness could be determinalistic. It's conceivable and consistent
that there could be a determinalistic PRNG operating in the world of
quantum mechanics.

In short, Bell's theorem says that you have to have at least one of
the following: 1- action at a distance, aka FTL interactions, or 2-
true randomness, aka no determinalism. To a lot of physicists, both
seem rather, "unintuitive", shall I say. Such is the world of quantum
physics.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: The halting problem revisited Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-03-29 12:42 -0700
  Re: The halting problem revisited Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-03-29 16:27 -0700
    Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-30 01:16 +0100
      Re: The halting problem revisited Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-03-29 23:18 -0400
        Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-30 15:39 +0100
          Re: The halting problem revisited Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-03-31 16:08 +1300
          Re: The halting problem revisited Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-03-31 08:34 -0400
      Re: The halting problem revisited Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-03-30 04:04 -0700
        Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-30 15:47 +0100

csiph-web