Saturday, July 30, 2016

More on nonlocality and realism

I mentioned Musser and nonlocality, and Lumo adds:
George Musser identified himself as the latest promoter of the delusion started by John Bell, the delusion saying that the world has to be "non-local" ...

The truth is just the opposite one, of course. Locality works perfectly – at least in non-gravitational context. ...

All the differences between classical physics and quantum mechanics are consequences of the nonzero commutators in quantum mechanics i.e. the uncertainty principle. There are absolutely no other differences between classical physics and quantum mechanics. That fact also means that whenever the commutators between the relevant quantities are zero or negligible, the difference between classical physics and quantum mechanics becomes zero or negligible, too.

The uncertainty principle is the actual reason why it's inconsistent in quantum mechanics to assume that the observables have their values before they're actually observed.
Yes, and that is how the quantum mechanics textbooks have explained it since before EPR, Bohm, and Bell.

Here is a new paper on retrocausality in quantum mechanics, and the authors keep talking about how they want to believe in "realism" and reality. That means that physical systems have their values before they're actually observed. Quantum mechanics shows that observables cannot have their values before observations, but realism is the hope that the state can be fully described by other variables before observation.

So realism is not a belief in the real world, but a believe in a mathematical abstraction of reality. This word usage seems peculiar to me, as I would have said that I believe in realism until I found out what they mean by the term. In quantum mechanics, realism has been a dead-end for 80 years.


  1. As you are describing it, realism is mathematical platontism, the philosophy that mathematics 'informs' reality from some other realm of existence.

    I am weary of overeducated mathematicians who think they are in touch with the underpinnings of reality when they don't even know what words mean, rudimentary history, or where their precious concepts arise from.
    Mathematicians are so comfortable defining anything and
    everything in any way they please, they forget that words actually do have actual meanings outside their tiny
    bubble. Time after time I'm confronted with the blustery hubris of "I don't need to know that crap." Perhaps if they knew a teeny bit about some of 'that crap' that occurred before their precious births they might not go running off tautological cliffs like a bunch of lemmings.

    I grabbed this definition from a site, doesn't really matter which since they are all from the same vein:

    "Platonism about mathematics (or mathematical platonism) is the metaphysical view that there are abstract mathematical objects whose existence is independent of us and our language, thought, and practices. Just as electrons and planets exist independently of us, so do numbers and sets. And just as statements about electrons and planets are made true or false by the objects with which they are concerned and these objects' perfectly objective properties, so are statements about numbers and sets. Mathematical truths are therefore discovered, not invented."

    Problem with this definition is, it is basically no different than saying the works of William Shakespeare are contained within the English alphabet, since letters
    and words etc. exist 'independently'...problem is, they actually don't. Words and their meanings only actually exist in your head. You can encode definitions and explanations in symbols in various mediums, but they aren't actually abstract ideas or concepts until they reside inside a persons mind. This is not to say that everything that is exists in a person's mind...for
    example, actual objects don't, but all abstractions
    including mathematical concepts, terminology, operations ) are dependent upon a conscious intellect (a mind) to reside within to even have a tentative existence.

    Quite simply,
    math is a type of abstraction, and abstraction is:


    1. an abstract or general idea or term.

    2. the act of considering something as a general quality or characteristic, apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances.

    Carefully note the 'apart from concrete realities, specific object, or actual instances.'

    This is why philosophy is important, if you don't understand what 'platonism' is:

    "noun: Platonism

    the philosophy of Plato or his followers.

    •any of various revivals of Platonic doctrines or related ideas, especially Neoplatonism and Cambridge Platonism (a 17th-century attempt to reconcile Christianity with humanism and science).

    •the theory that numbers or other abstract objects are objective, timeless entities, independent of the physical world and of the symbols used to represent them. "

    Then you don't even know your conceptualization is
    dependent upon a particular type of metaphysical philosophy.

    You can bitch and moan about post modern philosophy all you like, but if you don't understand the history of philosophy and the attendant concepts that shape thought, like a person ignorant of anything before they were born, you are easily duped into repeating the past mindlessly.

    1. You are obviously a person with Asperger's syndrome, who was asleep his whole life:
      Wake Up!

    2. Matthew, seriously, do you even know what Asperger's syndrome is? I'm sorry, but you aren't too clever if you can't handle the actual meanings of words. If mentioning the actual definitions of words and concepts offends you, take thee to a dictionary and/or a history book and look it up yourself.

    3. Apparently, you try to converse with people more educated than yourself. I have read Simon Baron-Cohen's book and also Iain McGilchrist's: The Divided Brain

      It's like a media that suddenly and unpredictably shouts down Trump for asking why a women with a burka wasn't even allowed to speak at the DNC, which was championing an ultra-feminist candidate. This country has such poor breeding that the GOP joined in with the media's capricious Trump bashing. You guys are genetic defectives and Left-brained idiots. This is one of the only countries in the world where retarded people flock to be called genius.

      Morons like yourself can't even address my video and all the EMPIRICAL anomalies you can't explain. You are troll and nothing but a troll with formulaic and annoying posts. They are so dull and tedious that only a pencil-neck geek could craft them.

    4. Matthew, calm down.

      You are literally arguing with the dictionary definitions of the words 'abstraction' and 'platonism', so please get a grip. If well defined words and concepts cause you to become unhinged, and you are unable to discern the difference between actual objects and abstract entities, perhaps counseling would be advised.

      As to 'your video', I have really no idea which video you are even referring to since you didn't bother to tell me. Very odd you should call me a troll when you know next to nothing about me or my background, politics, or my intelligence, much less what I have or haven't read, and frankly, as unstable as you appear to be, I wouldn't think it wise to correct you.

      Please refrain from non sequitur ad hominem and stick to on topic arguments.

    5. Can't see a link in my post? Troll.

  2. Dear Roger,

    Thanks for sharing this brilliant comment. (Its relevance to the post, now, _you_ decide.)


    Ummm... CFT,

    Ditto---I mean the first part of it. [And if you ask me, Roger in his next post/comment here is going to go over both our tops. ... Loose delivery; a sixer. (I am an Indian; was talking about a cricketing metaphor.) Else, he will keep quiet. ...]


    Ummm... Dear Roger,

    You must be doin' something good if your blog attracts comments like that.


    Hmmm.... Lemme think.... Aristotle. Yes. Aristotle. That's the common thread. To us all. Or, rather, his natural principles. Including what Nature is Really like. [I must stop now. I don't like the infinite regress myself. And it occurs only in intellectualization, never in Reality.]


    Best, anyway,

    PS: No, Roger, the ``very likely'' expected job didn't come through. (The one I wrote about in my last comment at your blog some time ago.) ..... Ummm... Surviving?, Yes... ... But, no, no SOS!... Oh well, never mind. Had [just] a bit of a drink before sitting down typing in this [stupid] comment.