(ALPHA) EPR Paradox---SciForums Journal Club

Dammit, just when I found a possibly comprehensible layout of the actual math.

But I admit I'm stuck. What I can't get clear is what exactly the logical influence of the quantum theory is - I can see that the theory predicts that the negatively measured electron spin will correspond to what it would have been if positively measured, rather than what one would expect from classical analysis of an unmeasured spin.

What I can't get clear is what happens to the classical analysis - exactly - when the electron is unmeasured and in all spins.
no paradox - really

Has anyone read the paper yet?

The finding errors is not easy.

So I'll just state the reality:

The culprit is the 'Projection Postulate'.
Without it, everything works correctly, and there is no paradoxes.
Bell is on the wild geese chase.


I see no paradox, only the sadness of Einstein's holding dearly to the claim that what happens at 'a' should not influence what happens at 'b', where a and b are some distant apart.

As I see it, Bell comlpicated the issue somewhat by attempting to fix the short commings of QM from within instead of starting some new or original system external to QM.

There is the must reading of David Bohms paper where he presents an expression that treats all the parameters (in equations of m otion) as real with the somewhat chilling conclusion that the expression requires nonlocal parameters, so "spooly". He does, however, come to the same result as modern QM. The advantage is treatment of parameters as real and not merely "spooly" mathematical wave equations, as opposed to physical wave equations regarding interference, is obvious.

Spooky it isn't when we consider that the nonlocal and the local must have interfaces in order for the nonlocal to have a crucial (existence necessary) effect on the local, or what is sometimes referred to as the "observed" - no nonlocal, no local, it is as simple as that.:shrug:​