[ExI] simulation

scerir scerir at libero.it
Mon Dec 17 10:57:19 UTC 2007

> We'll think of interpretations when we have 
> observations violating Einstein's dictum 
> (no superluminal information transfer). 
> So far, there are none, zilch, zero.

It would be interesting to check where
Einstein actually wrote that dictum
(no FTL *information* trasfer).

Is it possible that E. had in mind no FTL
causation, no FTL influences, no FTL actions,
no FTL passions, and that the dictum is
a modern elaboration?


>From the quantum mechanical perspective
and, specifically, speaking of correlations
between entangled entities, there are 4 
possible theoretical domains (Cirelson's bounds). 

More or less so ...

1.Classical non-FTL correlation (ie two fragments of a
                                  bomb): bound <2
2.Quantum non-FTL correlation: bound >2 but <2  2^1/2
3.Super-Quantum non-FTL correlation: bound >2  2^1/2 but 
                            <2  2^1/2  2^1/2
4.Quantum FTL correlation: bound >2  2^1/2  2^1/2

Number 4. is completely unknown (does it correspond
to a deterministic quantum mechanics?) .

Number 1. is classical mechanics.

Number 2. is the usual quantum mechanics (Bell's bound).

Number 3. is rather unknown, in the sense that
people do not understand if superquantum non-FTL 
correlations are really existing, or not, and why.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list