Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Feb 1, 2013 in Seminar--A local approach | 2 comments

Seminar: A local realistic reconciliation of the EPR paradox–Part 3 Video

This is part 3 of a seminar I gave in the Department of Chemistry, McGill University, January 22, 2013


The following are segments of the talk:

Part 1: Introduction and the Statistical Ensemble Interpretation of quantum mechanics
Part 2: The EPR paradox and problems with quantum mechanics
Part 3: Measurement and EPR experiments

Coming Soon:
Part 4: Entanglement and Non-locality
Part 5: The Two Dimensional spin model
Part 6: Corroboration and summary
Part 7: Questions
In this part the following points are made:

The longest standing unsolved problem in quantum mechanics is the EPR paradox. In this part of the seminar it is pointed out that quantum mechanics is a theory of measurement of the microscopic.  This means that a probe of some sort must be used to “see” spin.  However it is pointed out that states exist in the completely isotropic environment in the absence of a probe.

These new states carry the correlation that accounts for the violation of Bell’s Inequalities, as discussed in parts 4 and 5 that are coming soon.


  1. I loved this explanation. I am a graduate in physics and I wrote something about this phenomenon. I know my paper is very incomplete and written in a basic mathematical language. I hope that it helps another physicist or, at least, it will have a value as intellectual entertainment.

  2. @Leonardo Thanks for your comment. I looked at your paper and glad to see that you promote local realism. You say that you do not use LHV (which is what I use in the statistical ensemble interpretation) but if at any instant a system is in a pure state, and then at some other instant in another (or have I got it wrong) then are not all those time stamps equivalent to LHV?

    I think I might have anticipated some of what you are saying, so please look at some of my ideas on this blog and let me know what you think.

    My feeling over the last 15 years is that physics has gone from saying “Non-locality is well established.” to, “Well it does not make much sense and no one can explain it, so we had best look for some alternate description of the EPR paradox.”

    I think people are no longer listening to or are doubting the party line.

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *