By contrast, associated with orthodox quantum mechanics is the foundational position referred to here as "axiomatic non-signalling". This position we refer to as "effective non-signalling". Concerning Bell's theorem, we argue that Bell employed both interpretations, and that he finally adopted the operational position which is associated often with ontological quantum theory, e.g., de Broglie-Bohm theory. However, as a `no-go' theorem there exist two opposing interpretations of the non-signalling constraint: foundational and operational. However, does the presence of hidden superluminal influences automatically imply superluminal signalling and communication? The non-signalling theorem mediates the apparent conflict between quantum mechanics and the theory of special relativity. It is a frequent assumption that-via superluminal information transfers-superluminal signals capable of enabling communication are necessarily exchanged in any quantum theory that posits hidden superluminal influences.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |