Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mimsy!flink
From: flink@mimsy.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Aspect Experiment, Bell's inequalities, and Meaning of QM
Message-ID: <6791@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-May-87 23:23:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: mimsy.6791
Posted: Tue May 26 23:23:35 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 28-May-87 04:24:34 EDT
References: <1275@cci632.UUCP> <766@klipper.cs.vu.nl> <650@pbhyc.UUCP> <19028@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: flink@mimsy.UUCP (Paul V Torek)
Followup-To: sci.philosophy.tech,sci.physics
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 18
Keywords: aspect superluminance hidden variables Bell's inequality
Xref: utgpu sci.philosophy.tech:85 sci.physics:1388
Summary: And another question...

kube@cogsci.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Paul Kube) writes:
>So, everybody, what do you want to give up: the impossibility of FTL
>information transfer, that the particle was spinning happily left all
>along, or the relevance of mathematics for physics?

Good question; here's another:  if we take the second option, what are the
philosophical implications, if any?  Might we take the Aspect et. al.
experiments to show merely that, at least in the case of "spin" etc., we
have picked the wrong concepts with which to describe the real world?

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.  I'll let a more QM-fluent netter explain
why.  Please direct followups to whichever group(s) are appropriate, and
only those.
--
Paul Torek						flink@mimsy.umd.edu