[ExI] Bell's Inequality

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki
<rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A variation on superdeterministic, as has been stated before, but I
>> shall repeat: what we measure was the truth all along, at least back
>> to when the last decision by a sentient entity that could affect the
>> outcome was made.
>
> ### Forgive me if it sounds like trolling, but are invisible unicorns
> sentient? What about bacteria? They do some information processing, so maybe
> they can collapse the wave function, at least a little bit?

In this part, I am not talking about collapse.  I am talking about
decisions and actions that happen well before the measurement (and
resulting collapse of the knowledge space).  And the only reason I am
talking about that is because of the "free will" objection - which, as
noted, is itself so poorly defined and immeasurable that the only
reason to even acknowledge it is that it keeps coming up.

If you want to strip that out, then it reduces to: what we measure was
the truth since before the measurement.  No real thing collapses; only
the range of possibilities that we know it could be collapses, as most
of them prove to be incompatible with the measurement.

> If the multiplicity of universes under QM makes you uneasy, well, you can
> Shut-Up-And-Calculate, never allowing yourself to think about QM's
> corollaries but certainly don't try to add invisible fairies to QM and say
> it's still science.

Invisible fairies, invisible multiple worlds...

If the possibility that this is all math and information - that the
answers were there all along, we just hadn't found (and couldn't find)
them until we measured, and there are no other universes that
magically come into being just conveniently forever beyond our reach -
makes you uneasy, you too can Shut-Up-And-Calculate.