They appear to be fully random so it’s gamblers fallacy to say we’re due for one, though this has been a very long gap without one. There don’t seem to be extinction events associated with them regardless though so nbd hopefully.
The Bell Test rules out the possibility of a local hidden variable theory explaining quantum entanglement. That means the states of the two entangled particles are not simply unknown before measurement, they do not have independent states.
This means either, when you measure one particle it “instantaneously” affects the other, which has weird implications for causality because which particle is measured “first” can depend on your reference frame.
Or there is something statistical and truly random going on.
Oh I didn’t mean to refer to hidden variables. I think there’s just a fatal superfluence of available variables. Rather than an inability to know, the problem is an inability to know everything all at once.
They appear to be fully random so it’s gamblers fallacy to say we’re due for one, though this has been a very long gap without one. There don’t seem to be extinction events associated with them regardless though so nbd hopefully.
No extinction events related, but it will fuck up the modern world for a good bit until we can adapt.
To some degree maybe, to a massive degree maybe. It seems unlikely to happen on such a fast timescale that we couldn’t respond to it though.
Nothing in nature is fully random, just chaotic beyond our ability to model. Effectively random though? Yes, totally.
We have good reason to believe quantum mechanics is truly random
What’s the good reason?
The Bell Test rules out the possibility of a local hidden variable theory explaining quantum entanglement. That means the states of the two entangled particles are not simply unknown before measurement, they do not have independent states.
This means either, when you measure one particle it “instantaneously” affects the other, which has weird implications for causality because which particle is measured “first” can depend on your reference frame.
Or there is something statistical and truly random going on.
Oh I didn’t mean to refer to hidden variables. I think there’s just a fatal superfluence of available variables. Rather than an inability to know, the problem is an inability to know everything all at once.
The Bell Test is still a cool proof though.
Realities of the uncertainty principle aside, the difference is academic when you look at chaotic phenomena.
I agree, but my pedantry knows no bounds!
Nice try Kerrigan, it’s clear you’re trying to trick the Terrans into not shielding our computers.
deleted by creator