From: Jos.bergervoet@xs4all.nl   
      
   [Note to moderator: is astro.multivax.de still the best address to use?]   
   [[Mod. note -- Yes, emailing to   
     sci-physics-research at astro dot multivax dot de   
   is the most reliable way to submit to sci.physics.research.   
   Other submission mechanisms all ultimately turn into email   
   to that address.   
   -- jt]]   
      
   On 8/29/2025 4:32 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:   
   > Lydia Marie Williamson  wrote or quoted:   
   >> Does the electron "know" it is in a superposition before measurement,   
   >   
   >    "Superposition" only makes sense when it is said of /what/.   
   >    It's like asking whether a number "knows" it's a sum. Just   
   >    like any number can be seen as the sum of something, every   
   >    state can be seen as the superposition of other states.   
      
   Absolutely true, being a superposition in general is meaningless. In   
   some cases it might perhaps be meant as a superposition of "close-to-   
   classical" states (in a pointer basis). And of course if you choose   
   a basis then there is a distinction between single basis vectors and   
   superpositions thereof. But I fully agree with you, most discussions   
   about superpositions are discussions about nothing.   
      
   >   
   >    When an electron was prepared with a spin up or spin down in   
   >    the /z/ direction, there are equal probabilities to then measure   
   >    spin up or down in the /x/ direction.   
      
   There are equal /amplitudes/. using the word /probabilities/ is only   
   justified if you believe that the wave function will collapse into   
   just one of the "terms" of the sum (with those probabilities!) But   
   as we know today, QM can work perfectly well without the collapse   
   assumption (just by entanglement and decoherence..)   
      
   >   
   >    The violation of Bell's inequalities shows that before the spin   
   >    is measured in the x direction, the z prepared electron does /not   
   >    yet "know"/ whether it will have spin up or down in the x direction.   
      
   No, violation of Bell's inequalities occurs with or without knowledge   
   of electrons, machines, living beings, or whatever. It is just   
   expressing that correlations in QM can be sqrt(2) times higher   
   than the bound that Bell's inequality gives. They are still limited   
   by Tsirelson's bound, but also that occurs regardles whether anyone   
   "knows" it or not!   
      
   --   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)