Post #1428104
2026-04-18 16:52 UTC
@AmenZwa I studied digital signal processing for my master’s, in the 1980s, and that required a course in random process analysis. So I have read John S. Bell’s stuff and he does precisely what we were taught NOT to do. The entirety of this nonsense is just nonsense.
And quantum mechanics is just probability theory and simple rotations written in an obfuscated vector notation. That is what ‘complex Hilbert space’ means: an obfuscated vector notation. It does not mean ‘entanglement’.
Replies (1)
-
@chemoelectric@masto.ai 2026-04-18 16:55
@AmenZwa I actually came up with two proofs that Einstein could have used that are better than the EPR argument, to show that there is no ‘quantum physics’ distinct from ordinary physics. One is that all mathematical methods MUST reach the same result. So there cannot be ANY physics problem soluble only by ‘quantum’ methods. The other is that any ‘quantum’ word problem has infinite exact logical equivalents in any problem domain you can name, nothing to do with physics.