[ExI] Demonstration of Bell's Inequality
Adrian Tymes
atymes at gmail.com
Wed Nov 23 08:11:16 UTC 2016
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:
> What you are suggesting is called a "local hidden variable theory" and it
> is precisely what violations of Bell's Inequality rule out.
>
> To convince yourself of this, I suggest you attempt to write a computer
> program (or even two) designed to allow two non-networked computers to
> each accept an input bit and return a random (pseudorandom actually)
> output bit UNLESS both the input bits happen to be equal on both computers
> in which case each returns the NOT function of the other algorithm's
> output.
I fail to see how that has anything to do with the example in question.
In the example in question, the two particles start out "entangled" -
that is, if you know the state of one, then you know the state of the
other. This is not true for two pseudorandom numbers generated
independently on two different computers.
(Also, "returns the NOT function of the other algorithm's output",
where the other algorithm returns the NOT function of this algorithm's
output, is an infinite loop.)
I have seen people suggest strawmen like this, in an effort to defend
the view that hidden variables are impossible.
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list