History and Philosophy of Physics

   

An Examination of Measurement Relevant to Entanglement and Ontology: Answers to Some Long Standing Questions.

Authors: Georgina Woodward

This paper is about how measurement has been misunderstood and that has led onto further misunderstanding. It has given the impression of ‘spooky action at a distance’ and made it seem that Bell’s inequalities argument supporting that must be correct. An argument is presented here, considering whether some measurements are not informing about the pre-existing properties of particles; but rather provoking responses that are providing the measurement outcomes. The mathematically impossible predictions for quantum experiments when pre-existing properties are assumed is looked at, while provocations are considered. That is, with regard to different orientations of response being of non-equivalent type and therefore not justifiably, added and subtracted; calling into question the applicability of Bell’s inequalities. Different categories of measurement are given. Entanglement is discussed in the light of the previous measurement arguments. Concluding that entanglement is due to symmetry, shown in same first measurement outcomes fitting predictions. There is refutation of faster than light communication, as a measurement is a response to the provocation supplied by the apparatus, not a preexisting property that has come into being upon first partner measurement. An ontological background for QM, relativity and perception is mentioned and reference made to the RICP explanatory framework. The Harry Beck London underground ‘Tube’ map is used in an argument that high predictive power does not necessarily equate to complete correspondence with underlying reality, only an aspect or some aspects of it.

Comments: 20 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2016-08-13 01:10:37
[v2] 2016-08-20 18:34:34

Unique-IP document downloads: 40 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus