Re: Marmet's analysis of Mermin's experiment

srp a écrit :
cafeinst@xxxxxxx a écrit :
srp wrote:
cafeinst@xxxxxxx a écrit :
Does this make article sense?

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/Uncertainty/Uncertainty.html

Craig
Marmet was a well known physicist, deeply knowlegeable in
electromagnetism. Passed away June 2005.

If you think settling this question important to you, I suggest
you do like all reasearchers, which is to dig into Maxwell
electromagnetism and Lorentz extension until you can yourself
directly understand the paper and then trust your own judgement
as to its value.

That's why I'm writing here. So I can get the opinions of the experts.
Since I am not an expert, I don't trust my own judgement.

For instance, I read a paper by Herbert Dingle which claimed to refute
Einstein's relativity theory. And I was convinced that he was correct,
but because I knew I am just an amateur, I knew I had to get expert
opinions before making a definite conclusion. So I wrote in here. And
sure enough, I'm now convinced that Einstein was correct and I now have
a deeper appreciation of Einstein's theory of relativity.

That's the way to go.

As to who you will end up considering experts, there is a perspective
to be set up.

There are two distinct groups of experts who are likely to give
opinions, and/or references, and both are of the opinion that the
other group is not very rational.

You have the group (the non causalists) that does not believe that
fundamental physical reality will ever be understood (the majority
of physicists) and you have the group (the causalists) that does
believe that eventually all about fundamental physical reality will
at some point be understood as more data is gathered and analyzed.

Mermin belong to the first group, which includes quite a few famous
names, like Bohr, Heisenberg, Wheeler, Feynman, to name only a few.

Marmet, on his side, belong the the causalist group, along with quite
a few other famous names, like Planck, Shroedinger, Einstein, de Broglie
and many others.

The arguments that the first group of experts find convincing are
just about meaningless to the other group.

But depending on your own fundamental approach, the experts of one
of these two groups will end up making more sense to you than those
of the other group. This is how you will find your way.

So if anybody can provide any insights into Marmet's paper, I would
appreciate this.

I see. From my reading of the paper, his arguments are quite clear,
and convincing (to me) but they require prior understanding of Maxwell
electromagnetism.

This can't be helped.

Marmet being a causalist, he naturally opposes the Mermin explanation
and brings to bear a perfectly causal explanation of his own, which
in turn will carry no weight whatsoever with Mermin or any other
non causalist.

Without clear prior Maxwell electromagnetism comprehension, trying to
understand Marmet's arguments is aking to trying to figure the
sound of an original Russian text without mastering the cyrillic
alphabet.

One last point about the causalist group. Since they are a minority
and that non-causalist have become the majority during the 1950's
in peer review panels, no causalist paper of any kind has been
allowed for publication in any formal western paper since the 1960's.

Marmet has succeeded in having some of his work formally published
only in eastern (Russian) journals, like that of the Kazan University.

On account of this difficulty, dedicated sites on the Internet, like
the newtonphysics site, are the only places you are likely to find
causalist papers available.

Another source is the de Broblie Foundation site

André Michaud
.