[ExI] QT and SR (was Re: Probability is"subjectivelyobjective".)

scerir scerir at libero.it
Wed Jul 16 21:34:30 UTC 2008


> Scerir, thank you very much for your detailed explanation.

Jef, this is the best (but often difficult) book about QM
               http://tinyurl.com/6o6n5z
and you can freely download more than 460 pages. Among them
one can find many true profundities :-)

On page 162 (of the book, not the pdf) - but see also
the interesting pages 160,161 - Asher wrote:
" .... the quantum correlation is always stronger than
the classical one, except in the trivial cases where
both are 0 or ±1. Are you surprised? If so, this is
the result of having been exposed to unfounded quantum
superstitions, according to which quantum theory is
afflicted by more "uncertainty" than classical mechanics.
Exactly the opposite is true: quantum phenomena are more
disciplined than classical ones. We shall again see this
in Chapter 11, where quantum chaos will be found much tamer
than classical chaos."

Unfortunately Asher did not elaborate further this topic.
But - as Damien pointed out in a post - the paradoxical
aspects of quantum mechanics are due to interference.
Also the violation (by quantum entangled systems) of
Bell's inequality can be shown to arise from interference.

And - speaking of the epistemic/ontic issue - interference
can be seen or as an algebraic effect or as an effect,
which takes place in abstract tensor product spaces,
due to the Schroedinger's "waves", which can entangle
particles no matter how far apart they are.

Coming back to the subject line let us read Dirac (1972)
"It [nonlocality] is against the spirit of relativity,
but is the best we can do at the present time ... and,
of course, one is not satisfied with such a theory.
I think one ought to say that the problem of reconciling
quantum theory with relativity is not solved."




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list