This paper (or article) at arXiv is written at a relatively non-technical level. I have only skimmed it at the moment, but will come back to read it later:
All nonsense of cause. Rutherford was a great scientist. But things got pretty bad after him. His and Bohr's orbiting model is a bit unfortunate. While a functional model at the time it could only lead to a build-up of nonsense if the profession failed to update it.
"In this short survey article, I discuss Bell's theorem and some strategies that attempt to avoid the conclusion of non-locality. I focus on two that intersect with the philosophy of probability: (1) quantum probabilities and (2) superdeterminism. The issues they raised not only apply to a wide class of no-go theorems about quantum mechanics but are also of general philosophical interest."
This is actually quite encouraging However notice the implied sacred cows that the poor bugger has to get around. He's trying to make sense of it in a political mine-field.
2 comments:
All nonsense of cause. Rutherford was a great scientist. But things got pretty bad after him. His and Bohr's orbiting model is a bit unfortunate. While a functional model at the time it could only lead to a build-up of nonsense if the profession failed to update it.
"In this short survey article, I discuss Bell's theorem and some strategies that attempt to avoid the conclusion of non-locality. I focus on two that intersect with the philosophy of probability: (1) quantum probabilities and (2) superdeterminism. The issues they raised not only apply to a wide class of no-go theorems about quantum mechanics but are also of general philosophical interest."
This is actually quite encouraging However notice the implied sacred cows that the poor bugger has to get around. He's trying to make sense of it in a political mine-field.
Post a Comment