On Jul 17, 2017, at 8:57 PM, Stanley A. KLEIN <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote:

 

On Jul 17, 2017, at 3:11 PM, Stanley A. KLEIN <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote:

It is my unde

​

rs

​

tanding that all approaches other than Jack's give identical predictions for all experiments, of course other than psi that would eliminate almost all present interpretations of QM/QFT. 

 

​Jack:  ​

That's not true since only Yakir's approach gives the Bohm trajectories in the weak measurements as shown in Aephraim Steinberg's REAL DATA - this is again only for QM not what I am talking about i.e. PQM beyond QM.

​

Stan:  Jack,  Yakir has always been very clear that his interpretation gives identical results as that of von Neumann (made relativistic) and all the others. 

​

 

 

Ruth, while I'm commenting on your writings I would like to note that it would be good if you could confirm that the very special violation of Born rule that Henry Stapp and I make use of in a particular version of the Bem type psi experiment does not violate Maxwell's equations.

 

 

​Jack:   ​

ANY VIOLATION OF BORN RULE VIOLATES QM. YOUR MODEL IS A PQM MODEL WITHOUT BOHM'S BEABLES.

 

​Stan:  Yes, of course that is true. Our model is nothing like a PQM model. It is very standard von Neumann/Wigner QM/QFT except that when a measurement is done by a sentient creature with a fancy brain, then the Born Rule can be violated.  The QFT amplitudes are unchanged. Just the outcomes are changed in the modified vN/Wigner QM collapse mechanism. This is what Henry Stapp has been advocating as a possibility for a while. I say "possibility" since it is also possible that the vN/Wigner QM is left as is without the modified Born Rule. The modification is needed for psi  outcomes such as the Bem experiment. 

​Stan:  ​

That is because the random number generator we use for the Bem experiment is based on a truly single photon obtained in a down-conversion apparatus that avoids Maxwell, and truly has a single photon involved,  There are no coherent states of electromagnetism involved. So your logical argument connecting Born violation and Maxwell violation isn't relevant. 

 

 

​Stan:  I repeat:  In order to account for psi experiments like Bem's  Henry and I are postulating a single photon version of Bem, for simplicity. In order to account for the Bem result one needs to violate QM.  The likelihood of the Bem result being replicable is quite low, but it isn't impossible, and it needs to be replicated with some simple controls such as what Chris Cochran and I  ​published in the AIP Conference Proceedings p. 40002-1 to -9.  Incidentally Jack and Ruth also had articles in that Proceedings.  Even more relevant to this FoM list is the article I wrote that is in the FoM4 Cosmos and History vol 13 on pages 126-138. The title of the article is quite relevant to what we are discussing:

 

"USING PSYCHIC PHENOMENA TO CONNECT MIND TO BRAIN AND TO REVISE QUANTUM MECHANICS"

Thanks go to Sean O Nuallain for making that Vol 13 possible. I tried to be very clear on how the Born Rule violation works. In Section 3.1 of that paper titled "Modifications to Physics", we consider a number of modification to physics that would be needed if the Bem experiment was replicated when simple controls were included. One of the modifications was the modified Born rule, but there were also other possible modifications. Since this discussion is taking place on FoM it makes sense for readers (like Jack) to be familiar with the FoM4 publication that go into some greater depth on these topics. 

 

Stan