Timeline for Does Bell's theorem exclude local hidden variables as explanation for radioactive decay?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2015 at 16:13 | comment | added | Timaeus | @Morty Responded in the answer | |
| Aug 12, 2015 at 16:12 | history | edited | Timaeus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3720 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2015 at 14:58 | comment | added | Morty | Timaeus: Hi I agree that the decay itself is "real" but I was just wondering if the underlying principle behind it is so well-understood that the seeming indeterminism is necessarily quantum. And is not due to just high complexity in the particle interactions in the nucleus (see my other comment above where I compare it to the wheather)? | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 16:17 | comment | added | Timaeus | @Morty I made an edit to the answer, though I'm still not sure what is unclear about my answer. If I find out I'll fix it again. | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 16:15 | history | edited | Timaeus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 834 characters in body; added 156 characters in body
|
| Aug 11, 2015 at 14:42 | comment | added | Morty | OK yeah I know that Bell's theorem is in itself limited in what it rules out. But my question is I guess whether it even applies (or is known to apply) to radioactive decay, i.e. whether the seeming indeterministism in radioactive decay is known to derive from the quantum (and is not merely a, say, a classic phenomenon involving one or more state variable in the nuclei that we can't measure i.e. a "classic hidden variable"). | |
| Aug 10, 2015 at 21:29 | history | answered | Timaeus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |