Locally real refers to two ideas: locality and realness. Locality says that things are only affected by their local environment. Realness refers to whether particles have definite properties regardless of being measured.
There are two different types of 'real' according to the video:
Local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured and that things are only affected by their local environment. Einstein believed in local realism.
Non-local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured, but that these properties can be correlated in a way that violates locality.
The experiments described in the video show that non-local realism is more likely to be true than local realism.
In the video local realism = p-realism, while non-local realism = antirealism.
Therefore ideological and dogmatic p-realism of local realism is actually unreal and illusory.
Discuss??
Views??
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Sun Mar 03, 2024 4:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Locally real refers to two ideas: locality and realness. Locality says that things are only affected by their local environment. Realness refers to whether particles have definite properties regardless of being measured.
There are two different types of 'real' according to the video:
Local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured and that things are only affected by their local environment. Einstein believed in local realism.
Non-local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured, but that these properties can be correlated in a way that violates locality.
The experiments described in the video show that non-local realism is more likely to be true than local realism.
In the video local realism = p-realism, while non-local realism = antirealism.
Therefore ideological and dogmatic p-realism of local realism is actually unreal and illusory.
Discuss??
Views??
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:23 am
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
There's every reason to think that when you start thinking about "non-locality" as not merely a distance in space, but a distance in time.
The cause of this forum dates at least as far back as The Big Bang.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:23 am
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
There's every reason to think that when you start thinking about "non-locality" as not merely a distance in space, but a distance in time.
The cause of this forum dates at least as far back as The Big Bang.
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:23 am
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
There's every reason to think that when you start thinking about "non-locality" as not merely a distance in space, but a distance in time.
The cause of this forum dates at least as far back as The Big Bang.
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
(here I meant nonlocal hidden variables, like a 5th dimension)
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:23 am
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
There's every reason to think that when you start thinking about "non-locality" as not merely a distance in space, but a distance in time.
The cause of this forum dates at least as far back as The Big Bang.
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
That's not a realist stance.
The Big Bang is a singularity. Singularities are metaphysical/Mathematical entities.
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:58 am
There's every reason to think that when you start thinking about "non-locality" as not merely a distance in space, but a distance in time.
The cause of this forum dates at least as far back as The Big Bang.
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
That's not a realist stance.
The Big Bang is a singularity. Singularities are metaphysical/Mathematical entities.
That has nothing to do with the topic, okay word salad.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:17 am
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
That's not a realist stance.
The Big Bang is a singularity. Singularities are metaphysical/Mathematical entities.
That has nothing to do with the topic, okay word salad.
It has everything to do with the topic, salad brain.
Instantaneous (non-local) causal force beyond The Big Bang horizon makes things awkward for realism.
Locally real refers to two ideas: locality and realness. Locality says that things are only affected by their local environment. Realness refers to whether particles have definite properties regardless of being measured.
There are two different types of 'real' according to the video:
Local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured and that things are only affected by their local environment. Einstein believed in local realism.
Non-local realism: This is the idea that particles have definite properties regardless of being measured, but that these properties can be correlated in a way that violates locality.
The experiments described in the video show that non-local realism is more likely to be true than local realism.
In the video local realism = p-realism, while non-local realism = antirealism.
Therefore ideological and dogmatic p-realism of local realism is actually unreal and illusory.
Discuss??
Views??
There is no reason to think that locality/non-locality has anything to do with p realism/anti-realism. You start with equating them.
Your view is based on ignorance.
ChatGpt already informed you [somewhere] that scientists related to QM are divided into two camps, i.e. antirealists and p-realists.
Einstein [God do not play dice, hidden-variables] is a p-realist and is a staunch believer of locality.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:17 am
Well yes if we take such a totally realist stance, then we take such a totally realist stance. But you'll make VA cry even more than I did.
That's not a realist stance.
The Big Bang is a singularity. Singularities are metaphysical/Mathematical entities.
That has nothing to do with the topic, okay word salad.
Again you are ignorant.
The reality, fact, truth and objectivity of the Big Bang is only valid within the embodied human-based science-physics-cosmological FSRC.
You cannot state the Big Bang Theory without explicitly and implicitly grounding it upon the FSRC. You cannot claim Big Bang happened because my mother, father said so!
Since the FSRC is embodied and human-based, it follows deductively whatever the resultants it cannot be p-realist but has to be antirealist [Kantian and the like].
