On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 10:39 AM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
Oh dear. QM does rule out internal states.
I didn't think I would have to explain why I capitalised "Bell", but perhaps it was a bit too subtle. Google "Bell" and "inequalities", and go from there.
I disagree. Bell's Inequality is not dependent on QM...it's a mathematical statement about the outcomes of measurements where stochastic processes play a role. The fact that QM is strongly believed to involve stochastic processes is why Bell's inequality shows up prominently in QM. However, we cannot then use B.I. to prove things about QM. A more persuasive proof of why hidden variables are not viable in QM is the work done on extending some theorems about Hilbert spaces. Namely, Gleason's theorem from the mid-50s, later extended by Kochen and Specker in the 1960s. The Kochen-Specker Theorem is accepted as the "no go" proof that hidden variables is not viable.
The uncertainty principle was generally considered to rule out internal states long before Bell, though. Since around 1930, I think. Whether QM/the uncertainty principle is wrong is a different question.
Until K-S and related proofs, Bohm's internal states model (hidden variables) was not considered to be ruled out. I recommend a recent book, "Interpreting the Quantum World," by Jeffrey Bub, 1997. He summarizes the various interpretations of quantum reality and explains the K-S theorem reasonably well. The Asher Peres book on QM is also good. But, as I said, I accidentally beamed the message into this world. Those interested in discussing quantum reality and things like that should look into lists oriented in this direction. I don't think most list members here have the interest or the background, so discussions would be swamped by failures to communicate, abuses of language, and tangent rays. --Tim May "They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote." --Rep. Ron Paul, TX, on how few Congresscritters saw the USA-PATRIOT Bill before voting overwhelmingly to impose a police state