RE: "spooky action at a distance"

From: David Barrett-Lennard <>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:24:51 +0800

By small I meant "small number of particles".

- David

-----Original Message-----
From: scerir []
Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2003 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: "spooky action at a distance"

David Barrett-Lennard

> According to QM, in small systems evolving according to the
> time certainly exists but there is no arrow of time within the scope
> the experiment. In such small systems we can run the movie backwards
> and everything looks normal.

Yes, but how small? Because now they perform experiments
over large distance. Not just the 45 meters of the old
Jasin interferometer. But 10 km. or even 100 km. And
still they find interferences. (Of course those
beams are correlated and well protected!).

In general the argument 'contra' the transactional
interpretation is this one below (in this case, by
Anton Zeilinger). But I do not know well enough Cramer's
interpretation. So I cannot judge.

<In the Transactional Interpretation the state vector is
considered to be a real physical wave emitted as an
"offer wave" based on the preparation procedure of the
experiment. The interaction then comes to a close
through the emission of the "confirmation wave" by
what is usually called the collapse of the wave function.
The quantum particle, e.g. the photon, electron etc.,
is then considered to be identical with the finished
transaction. It is fundamental to that interpretation
that where the closure of the transaction takes place
is an unexplained input to the process.>
Received on Thu Nov 13 2003 - 20:27:02 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:08 PST