Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
What is Bell’s theorem actually telling us?
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Noldus, Johan |
| Copyright Year | 2015 |
| Abstract | We point out that there is no contradiction between the results of quantum mechanics and consequences of general relativity. 1 What is all the fuzz about? Recently, claims that a final Bell experiment has been performed excluding local realism (except for superdeterminism) are put into perspective. Years ago, I concluded that the only thing Bell's theorem [1] [2] is telling us is that the notion of locality of Bell can not be maintained for the microscopic world. While it works perfectly well for macroscopic objects (since they are not entangled in a way we would notice), something else seems to be going on for elementary particles. Nowadays, many people seem to think that at short distance scales our notions of spacetime must break down either because of the infinities arising in quantum field theory or for reasons inherently present in general relativity (that probing spacetime at such distances would cause the formation of microscopic black holes). Often, the point of view of a spacetime foam has been put forward. Now, the psychology of these authors is surprising, since most of them would refute the possibility of local realism. There are more conventional ways to be considered; that is, suppose that two entangled particles are connected by an Einstein Rosen bridge (better known as a wormhole) then it is possible for them to communicate at effective spacelike separated locations without exceeding the local velocity of light! Now, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics does not require the wormhole to be destroyed after both particles were measured, it only tells that both individual particles are put into a definite state (and that both particles together do not form a state of zero spin anymore) which is good since otherwise we would need a new dynamics for spacetime given that general relativity does not know how to deal with topology change. The only conclusion we must draw here is that elementary particles are not such simple objects as most people believe, they do not only carry internal “quantum” numbers but also hidden variables relating them to other particles. Effectively such theory is of course nonlocal but there is no need to look for theories with signals exceeding the local velocity of light; one only needs to recognize that for elementary particles the assumed notions of spacetime do not uphold. If one considers Einstein's thought that geometry and matter are influencing ∗email: johan.noldus@gmail.com |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://vixra.org/pdf/1509.0290v1.pdf |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
