Join me for a conversation with Nobel laureate Alain Aspect, who profoundly shaped our understanding of quantum mechanics

Here are the links to our conversation. YouTube: @WorldSciFest Website:

Thanks @bgreene. At the 4:20 mark, Alain summarizes Einstein's worldview as "local realism", where "locality" and "realism" are two separate assumptions. He then says that since "there is something wrong with this worldview", we must abandon either locality or realism. But Alain mischaracterizes Einstein's worldview, and seems to misunderstand the implications of the experiments he's famous for doing. When John Bell formulated his theorem, now called Bell's theorem, which makes used of his (Bell's) inequality, he formulated a notion of "locality" which he said was just a mathematically precise version of Einstein's idea of "locality". Bell called this notion local causality. He defined it as (see diagram attached): “A theory will be said to be locally causal if the probabilities attached to values of local beables in a space-time region 1 are unaltered by specification of values of local beables in a space-like separated region 2, when what happens in the backward light cone of 1 is already sufficiently specified, for example by a full specification of local beables in a space- time region 3...” Importantly, Bell's definition of local causality presupposes and is formulated in terms of a very basic notion of (scientific) realism: that a theory posits "local beables". This notion of "realism" is the idea that within delimited regions of space-time there exist independent of our observations and our minds physical entities, like particles or fields. Without local beables, there can be no "local causality" as formulated in Bell's theorem. Moreover, there is no separate "realism" assumption that Bell made in his theorem, at least not according to him and not that anyone else has been able to identify. So: Einstein's worldview is based on local causality, not two separate assumptions called "locality" and "realism". There is no logically coherent option of "accepting locality" and "rejecting realism". Alain's experimental results require us (if they were done correctly) to reject only local causality.

Could you please tell me, aren't probabilities simply a consequence of conducting a series of experiments with different initial and external conditions? The positions of atoms, electrons, and the characteristics of other particles are different in each specific experiment.

@NumunLabs is exploring the hypothesis that information, rather than matter or spacetime alone, is the primary dynamically entity governing physical systems. Over multiple domains (quantum, nonlinear PDE, general relativity and classical chaos)

@star_stufff

QM is wrong. My atomic structure model can explain the mechanism of stability of hydrogen atoms w/o QM.

Well, now I'm bound by my science-curious layman's mind to listen to this, don’t I?

Was really curious to hear his thoughts on the EPR <> ER and worm holes! Great question! Amazing to hear him walk through the non-locality experiment. 🙌🏽 great interview.

Enjoy all of your posts. A most interesting contradiction. I’ve always believed ed in a mathematical realm into which dynamic curvature at the rim of black holes is reflected by a quantum lens and resolved higher dimensions. Then it is reflected as spatial relations that define

@ProfBrianCox Alain Aspect’s experiments are legendary — they forced us to confront the reality of quantum entanglement head-on. Uniphics honours Aspect’s results while removing the “strangeness” entirely (Ch. 10 Quantum Phenomena and Information): - Entanglement = shared spin-wave phase between distant gyrotrons in the ξM-field (Ch. 5.5 Spin Wave Propagation) - The ξM-field is non-local (Ch. 2.6 Cosmic Web) — distance is emergent, so correlations are instantaneous without FTL signalling - Measurement = physical spin-wave coupling that drives the joint system to the lowest-E_d coherent state (Law of Negentropy, Ch. 1.1.1) — fully deterministic, no collapse, no hidden variables, no many-worlds Aspect’s perfect anti-correlations and Bell violations are reproduced exactly (Ch. 10.2 Quantum Experiments, Ch. 10.3 QED Equivalence), but in a single, deterministic world with no philosophical baggage. No spooky action — just the universe being one connected spin-wave field. Ch. 1-10 free at (intro PDF: Brian, Alain — would love your take on a deterministic, non-local-field resolution to the experiments. #QuantumEntanglement #Aspect #Uniphics #QuantumFoundations

So true. I’m proving this.

Hard for you to swallow

I dont think you need 3-N dimensions, they superimpose and you get a resultant 3 dimension or whatever your abstraction apparatus is.

Quantum physics reminds us that reality is far stranger, deeper, and more interconnected than we were ever taught to believe. At the smallest scales, particles aren’t solid objects, they’re probabilities, possibilities, and potential waiting to become real. Observation changes outcomes. Connection exists across distances.

Iv did something massive - @skdh @michiokaku @JDHamkins

Quantum physics and quantum biology and quantum sociobiology and quantum consciousness are a package and a wonderful gift that we get to use to live and enjoy our lives.

I sit on the side of Niels Bohr. It makes a lot more sense that everything depends on your relation to it. I work on this in my Relational Gradient.

Very enjoyable conversation. Thanks for going against the algorithm of clickbait engagement shallowness and offering substance.