However, this definition of “every trajectory is well-defined” has a problem.
If the trajectory concept cannot predict correct experiment results, “the trajectory concept is broken” is only one of the possible causes.
In other words, how can you know the non-classical results (aka quantum effects) are not due to other factors?
— Me@2021-02-15 05:03:20 PM
This question is exactly what the Bell tests designed for.
No. It is not correct. A Bell test can check whether the trajectory concept is well-defined, but not whether “the trajectory concept is broken” is the major source of quantum randomness.
However, it is the undefinable trajectory concept that makes the superposition, which is a unique and major feature of quantum mechanics.
— Me@2021-02-07 06:03:53 PM
— Me@2021-02-15 10:24:17 PM
— Me@2021-02-21 05:14:55 PM
To date, all Bell tests have found that the hypothesis of local hidden variables is inconsistent with the way that physical systems behave.
— Wikipedia on Bell test
Source of quantumness
~ the indistinguishability of cases
~ the individual trajectory of individual particles cannot be well-defined
~ the indistinguishability of particles
~ “individual” particle has no individuality
~ “individual” particle has no individual identity
— Me@2021-02-06 4:03 PM
— Me@2021-02-15 9:14 PM
2021.02.21 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK