On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 2:45:38 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:34 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 2:00:43 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:28 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 1:14:32 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:53 PM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10 Jun 2019, at 08:54, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:34 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Retrocausal hidden variable models are completely compatible with >>>>>>> experiments, unless QM itself is wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If retrocausality is right, then QM itself is certainly wrong. In the >>>>>> EPR situation, the singlet state is rotationally symmetric in standard >>>>>> QM, >>>>>> and this cannot be the case if that state is dependent on the future >>>>>> polariser settings. Conversely, if QM is right, retrocausality is >>>>>> impossible. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If QM with collapse is right, I would understand and agree. That is >>>>>> why Deutsch see the “retrocausality” has a semantic variant of the >>>>>> many-worlds interpretations, but I have not entirely figure out if this >>>>>> makes sense >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It makes no sense at all! Deutsch has gone completely off the rails >>>>> over quantum mechanics. He is essentially abandoning the theory as it >>>>> currently stands. The argument from symmetry is, to my mind, a total >>>>> killer >>>>> of any retrocausal explanation -- retrocausality must destroy the very >>>>> symmetry that is at the heart of the QM predictions for the singlet >>>>> state, >>>>> Collapse and many worlds are all irrelevant to this argument. >>>>> >>>>> The non-locality of the quantum singlet state is irreducible, and >>>>> neither retrocausality nor many worlds has any impact on this central >>>>> conclusion. >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> in the Omnes-Griffith-Gelman-Hartle view of the many-worlds. That >>>>>> would be nice and eliminate t’hooft’s need of “super-determinism” >>>>>> (mechanism is trivially "super-deterministic" in the third person view, >>>>>> but >>>>>> not at all in the first person views—that plays a role for >>>>>> free-will/self-determination). >>>>>> >>>>>> Bruno >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> "quantum mechanics [is] a theory of quantal histories, without ever >>>> needing to call on state-vectors, measurements, or external agents as >>>> fundamental notions" >>>> >>>> Rafael Sorkin >>>> https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/people/rafael-sorkin >>>> >>>> The whole thing about quantum "states" is just a cult view, like a >>>> religion. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Sorkin has a long history of misunderstanding the basis of quantum >>> mechanics. Paths, or quantum histories, are just a way of calculating >>> probabilities -- there is no ontology there. Just like Feynman diagrams, >>> virtual particles and all that. Merely calculational techniques with no >>> ontological content. Quantal histories do not eliminate the notion of the >>> "quantum state". >>> >>> Besides, quantal histories no more eliminate non-locality than does >>> retrocausality or many worlds. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>>> >>>> >> >> Of course in the reflective histories model there are histories and >> (their mirror images) futures. >> - https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/mirror-mirror/ >> >> >> Like I've said, people can wander through life believing in what they >> want. I did not have *God* speak to me and tell me the absolute truth >> about these things, like some apparently have. >> > > You have a remarkable ability to avoid the issues, Phil. Enlighten me > about what reflective histories can tell me about the world, and what > particular predictions they can make that cannot be obtained in other ways. > In other words, why should I care a stuff about what you are saying? > > Bruce >
Is there a particular detail in the article "The Reflective Path Integral" <https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/mirror-mirror/>you are pointing to? It seems to me there are umpteen "other ways" of predicting the same things. That's just Quine's scientific underdetermination of scientific theories. I was surprised to come across "mirror matter": *The theory of mirror matter predicts a hidden sector made up of a copy of the Standard Model particles and interactions but with opposite parity.* —arXiv:1710.00767 <https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.00767> That seems closer to the Reflective Path Integral than to Many Worlds, or to any other QM model. The path integral is the wave of the future. @philipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c2ef6fe8-f40a-4392-bd59-262435e3e6ac%40googlegroups.com.
