Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!69.16.185.11.MISMATCH!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!postnews.google.com!j13g2000pro.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Joshua Maurice Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: The halting problem revisited Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:27:54 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 61 Message-ID: <3b57f0d5-ca93-402a-afc1-b4ae4f413f47@j13g2000pro.googlegroups.com> References: <8v727mF46lU1@mid.individual.net> <8vbuiaFbm7U1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.108.188.134 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1301441274 7296 127.0.0.1 (29 Mar 2011 23:27:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 23:27:54 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: j13g2000pro.googlegroups.com; posting-host=12.108.188.134; posting-account=C7XBLgoAAAAxMpmeFo8Iv_pud1pyFhjy User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.16) Gecko/20110319 Firefox/3.6.16,gzip(gfe) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:2565 On Mar 29, 12:53=A0pm, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote: > Joshua Maurice 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. > > =A0 Marginally knowledgeable people are aware that > > =A0 =A0 =A0 every single experiment done so far (...) violates > =A0 =A0 =A0 a Bell inequality > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experiments > > =A0 and > > =A0 =A0 =A0 Aspect's experiments were considered to provide > =A0 =A0 =A0 overwhelming support to the thesis that Bell's > =A0 =A0 =A0 inequalities are violated > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Aspect > > =A0 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 wrote: > In message , Joshua Cranmer wrote: > > Heisenberg's uncertainty principle only states that we don't know the > > (P)RNG of the world. :-) > > Bell=92s 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.