kube@cogsci.berkeley.edu.UUCP (05/27/87)
In article <6791@mimsy.UUCP> flink@mimsy.UUCP (Paul V Torek) writes: > >By the way, I think you should say "FTL causal influence" rather than "FTL >information transfer". The collapse of a wave-packet in the Aspect >experiments, even if interpreted as involving FTL causal influence, would >not be useful for communication. The way I read the arguments based on Bell's inequalities, you can save the impossibility of FTL information transfer by giving up "hidden variables", but you can give up either one. (Or both...) On the standard QM interpretation, there are no hidden variables and the collapse of the wave packet cannot transfer information superluminally. Given the extent to which QM and special relativity have been confirmed, this is probably the reasonable choice; however, the possibility remains (so far as the Bell's-related experiments are concerned) that there are hidden variables of state that underlie the superluminal correlations. If you could observe the corresponding state changes (contra QM) you would have a superluminal information channel. >I'll let a more QM-fluent netter explain >why. Yes, please! More participation from the QM-fluent. Otherwise I'm left with the impression that I know what I'm talking about. --Paul kube@berkeley.edu, ...!ucbvax!kube