Authors: V.A. Kasimov
To refer again to the article A. Aspect "bell's THEOREM: the naive view of the experimenter" we were forced by some publications. However, we have again seen the conceptual correctness of the statement of the problem of EPR in the Aspect's article. In conceptual terms, in the "naive presentation of EPR" from the Aspect of no "splices" probabilistic measures of different spaces is not required. The presentation of the Aspect is logically closed and complete. The existence of a problem related to the violation of bell inequality is shown conceptually (by simple examples). The real possibility of solving this problem today is, in our opinion, only a relational interpretation of quantum mechanics [3], [4], since the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics Rovelli "puts out the brackets" local causality in the EPR paradox, replacing it with the concept of the integrity of the relations of the observed systems and, thereby, abandoning the concept of velocity, doubtful from the point of view of quantum mechanics as a derivative in the TMK-topology of space-time relations. And this is, apparently, what physics is "pregnant" for a long time! But the difficulty of resolution of the dilemma of completeness and the local causality associated with the absence of the notion of speed in the form of spatio-temporal derivative in the scalar form. And this is a common problem of quantum mechanics, which the relational concept intends to solve . In the proposed article there are all logical "ties", for each of which it would be possible to object and say - it is not so
Comments: 6 Pages. Язык: русский
Download: PDF
[v1] 2018-04-23 01:37:41
Unique-IP document downloads: 117 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.