• itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    it’s a matter of interpretation, but generally the consensus is that quantum measurements are truly probabilistic (random), Bell proved that there can’t be any hidden variables that influence the outcome

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Didn’t Bell just put that up as a theory and it got proven somewhat recently by other researchers? The 2022 physics Nobel Prize was about disproving hidden variables and they titled their finding with the catchy phrase “the universe is not locally real”.

          • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            No problem! Interpretations of quantum mechanics are also still very much under discussion, and Bell’s inequality only says that there are no local hidden variables. While QM very accurately describes observations so far, it’s by no means solved, and there’s a good chance that a new theory will upend much of it in the future

    • K0W4L5K1@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Interpretation for sure. Bells theory and then it being proven winning a Nobel prize to me only proves more we really don’t understand the world around us and only perceive what we need to survive. And that maybe we should be less standoffish to ideas that change our current paradigm, because we obviously have a lot to learn.