/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11426381]

I don't get what the big deal is.
Locality is true given all evidence ever recorded, so we just give up realism.
Why is this still debated?

[Anonymous No.11426400]

they are local through a wormhole or a metaphysical branch of space or whatever

it doesnt matter. just observations and consistency and axioms

[Elder NPC No.11426417]

>>11426400
So basically bedtime stories for those whose intelligence provides insecurity?

[Anonymous No.11426433]

>>11426381
The amount of grammar mistakes in this simple text is dumbfounding. Jessica should be ashamed and go back to school (in the UK, USAer education won’t solve it)

[Anonymous No.11427254]

>muh quantum wonder
fuck off popsci fag, the uncertainty and observer effect only apply to subatomic particles and it's very misleading to not mention that in order to observe, you need to have a photon hit or interact with the particle thus exciting it and changing its form.

[Elder NPC No.11427260]

>>11427254
Maybe you have the power to subatomize things upon observation, rendering them powerless.

[Anonymous No.11427292]

>>11426381

There are people who deep down think the postulate about speed of light can be violated, they are still active till today. I think I read a philosopher named Tim Maudlin who basically says it's not set in stone that Lorentz invariance has to be preserved. To quote him, Bell’s theorem, together with reported data, rules out local theories, full stop :)) not local realism or anything, because they believe, realist or antirealist is not a property of theories, it's the attitude of people towards theories.

[Elder NPC No.11427305]

>>11427292
All theories require the exclusion of at least unknown variable for it to be shared in the first place. The ego to presume that the place was not just perfect before you came along with your special interpretation of One.

[Anonymous No.11427398]

>>11427254
they use a polarizing filter they dont hit it with anything