On 5 February 2014 10:39, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/4/2014 1:11 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:59 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> There is nothing exotic about the state of a photon being determined by >> future boundary conditions. >> > > You *could* determine the state of any system in quantum theory by > future boundary conditions, but what would be exotic is the assumption that > neither past nor future boundary conditions are sufficient on their own, > that you need a combination of both. That just isn't how it works in > quantum theory, > > Some people think it is. When the past boundary condition doesn't > predict a definite future condition, then adding a future boundary > condition can resolve it. That's how Stenger effectively gets a non-local > effect in an EPR experiment. > > The point is that if there are both past AND future boundary conditions on a quantum entity like a photon, its state in between has to reflect them both. One isn't favoured over the other (assuming time symmetric physics, of course).
This explains delayed-choice experiments, by the way, as well as EPR correlations. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
