From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!umn.edu!umeecs!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!spssig.spss.com!markrose Tue Jun  9 10:06:49 EDT 1992
Article 6070 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!umn.edu!umeecs!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!spssig.spss.com!markrose
>From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Quantum mechanics (no AI here, sorry)
Message-ID: <1992Jun03.203556.4561@spss.com>
Date: 3 Jun 92 20:35:56 GMT
References: <1992Jun1.201556.24184@news.media.mit.edu> <1992Jun01.234940.40210@spss.com> <1992Jun2.161131.11780@guinness.idbsu.edu>
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Lines: 26
Nntp-Posting-Host: spssrs7.spss.com

In article <1992Jun2.161131.11780@guinness.idbsu.edu> holmes@opal.idbsu.edu 
(Randall Holmes) writes:
>If you think that the waves are real physical phenomena, then FTL
>signalling is involved.  I think it is quite reasonable to suppose
>that the universe has "real states"; the particle side of the
>particle-wave duality is real; the wave side encodes restrictions on
>what information we can have about the real situation.  There is no
>reason why we cannot know that there are correlations between the
>facts about two events which have a space-like separation, while we do
>not know the actual facts; once we acquire further information about
>one of these events, we immediately gain information about the other,
>but there is no superluminal communication involved (the correlations
>between the two facts derive from their common relationship with a
>third event which has time-like separation from each of them!).  The
>illusion of superluminal communication comes in when you suppose (and
>I believe this is built into the axioms of the arguments against
>hidden variables) that the waves are physical phenomena (and so behave
>"locally").  

I'm not sure I understand you, but I suspect you're wrong.  It's not just
a matter of observing a correlation across a huge distance.  It's that
you and another observer do something (twist a calcite crystal) and
immediately, before any signal could move from one to the other, the
correlation rate changes, in a way that can't be explained by local
properties of the particles.  There's something non-local going on here.
I don't see what difference it makes if you call it "phyical" or not.


