Bell's Theorem?

Question

I have tried to understand it, with difficulty, and have come away with the conclusion that it means the observable universe exists only when we observe it. It's kind of like a whole lot of potential realities exist and we create the universe from them.
Any thoughts??
Don't be too hard on me, I'm a math guy who gave up on physics at quantum mechanics.
Too bad I had to side with Einstein. Perhaps God does play dice.

Answer 1

I am sorry to inform you that you have been ejaculated on my Wikipedia. [[Intelectual Masturbation]]

What Wikipedia wants Bell's Theorem to mean and what Bell said are two differan things.

I used to be able to simply refer people to non Wiki sorces for a good explination of Bell's Theorem including thing like the acual word spoken by Bell.

Now many Univrsity Web sites have become contaminated with Wiki Ejaculate and false info.


Bell published his theorem. It was cast in terms of a hidden variable theory. Since then, other proofs have appeared by d'Espagnat, Stapp, and others that are not in terms of hidden variables. it was originally published in the American Journal of Physics 50, 811 - 816 (1982).

Bell's Theorem is the collective name for a family of results, all showing the impossibility of a Local Realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. There are variants of the Theorem with different meanings of “Local Realistic.” In John S. Bell's pioneering paper of 1964 the realism consisted in postulating in addition to the quantum state a “complete state”, which determines the results of measurements on the system, either by assigning a value to the measured quantity that is revealed by the measurement regardless of the details of the measurement procedure, or by enabling the system to elicit a definite response whenever it is measured, but a response which may depend on the macroscopic features of the experimental arrangement or even on the complete state of the system together with that arrangement. Locality is a condition on composite systems with spatially separated constituents, requiring an operator which is the product of operators associated with the individual constituents to be assigned a value which is the product of the values assigned to the factors, and requiring the value assigned to an operator associated with an individual constitutent to be independent of what is measured on any other constitutent. From his assumptions Bell proved an inequality (the prototype of “Bell's Inequality”) which is violated by the Quantum Mechanical predictions made from an entangled state of the composite system. In other variants the complete state assigns probabilities to the possible results of measurements of the operators rather than determining which result will be obtained, and nevertheless inequalities are derivable; and still other variants dispense with inequalities. The incompatibility of Local Realistic Theories with Quantum Mechanics permits adjudication by experiments, some of which are described here. Most of the dozens of experiments performed so far have favored Quantum Mechanics, but not decisively because of the “detection loophole” or the “communication loophole.” The latter has been nearly decisively blocked by a recent experiment and there is a good prospect for blocking the former. The refutation of the family of Local Realistic Theories would imply that certain peculiarities of Quantum Mechanics will remain part of our physical worldview: notably, the objective indefiniteness of properties, the indeterminacy of measurement results, and the tension between quantum nonlocality and the locality of Relativity Theory.

You can trust Stanford and if you can forget the Wikisperm you have been wxposed to it will all make sense.

Answer 2

The deal is that "existence" isn't really the province of physics. It's a metaphysical concept (meta means beyond or above) related to how one interprets the actual observable implications of a theory. Interpretations are things formally extraneous to a theory that philosophically minded people tack on to "make sense" of it all.

Anyway, Bell's Theorem is a challenge to one interpretation called "Realism" that maintains that there is an definite objective and complete description of the physical world which does not depend anyone knowing about it to be real. "Real" is another one of those extraneous words.

Answer 3

Attributes of things that occur naturally will always follow specific relationships.
---
Number(A, not B) + Number(B, not C) is greater than or equal to Number(A, not C)

This relationship is called Bell's inequality.

may be tried in any group of people
use the following natural attributes.
A=Male, B = >5feet 8inches, C=blue eyes.

When natural occurring things consistently do not work.
You may consider one of your assumptions to be incorrect. This may be used to test the assumptions of a natural attribute used in your calculations. If you find something wrong that is when there is much digression into speculation

The interpertation of what you find is what you make it to be. That part is somewhat speculative. It does not point to a result it only points to an error in one or more of the natural
attributes.

http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/BellsTheorem/BellsTheorem.html