Is there really Cause and Effect?

[LegionOnomaMoi]

The cause for the correlation is the entangling. No entangling = no correlation.

Entanglement is just a name we give to kinds of nonlocal effects. It's like saying "the cause of these nonlocal effects is quantum phlogiston". We aren't naming a cause we're defining an effect.

Bell's inequality only rules out local hidden variables.

Which means ruling out causality.

It's been hinted at for a long time that we'd have to abandon scientific realism, locality, multitudinism, or all three; so this isn't that unsurprising to me. Unfortunately I also don't have much of a constructive opinion that I can offer on it other than to note that it's better to drop locality (and thus causality) than scientific realism.

(emphasis added)

 

[PolyHedral]

Entanglement is just a name we give to kinds of nonlocal effects. It's like saying "the cause of these nonlocal effects is quantum phlogiston". We aren't naming a cause we're defining an effect.

The cause in God's handwriting the maths - when two things get entangled, the terms describing them form a structure with specific properties.

Which means ruling out causality.


(emphasis added)

I thought the solution was to rule out realism of observables.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

The cause in God's handwriting the maths - when two things get entangled, the terms describing them form a structure with specific properties.

True enough. Generally, though, we like to be a little more specific than this.

I thought the solution was to rule out realism of observables.

Realism is the idea that physical systems have observables independently of observation. To rule out the observables is to rule out realism.

 

[Mycroft]

I did public health for my undergrad alongside biology, and we always used to speak to these type of situations (multiple effects) as correlations not causes.

People often confuse the two. The best example of a correlation is a candle mistakenly being attributed to having burned down the house when, in reality, it was an exploding boiler in the basement.

But there can be multiple causes for a single effect, a single cause to multiple effects, and so on and so forth.

 

[Thief]

People often confuse the two. The best example of a correlation is a candle mistakenly being attributed to having burned down the house when, in reality, it was an exploding boiler in the basement.

But there can be multiple causes for a single effect, a single cause to multiple effects, and so on and so forth.

You mean cascade effect?...ok...
But let's not assume too much.

The singularity is one effect...having One Cause.