[Doctor Stochastic]

Could you describe an experiment that would lead to a revision of quantum mechanics? Where do you get the idea that QM predicts instant action at a distance? A reference to a refereed experiment would be useful. Aspect's experiment certainly doens't imply any instantaneoud action.

[mikegi]

Where do you get the idea that QM predicts instant action at a distance? A reference to a refereed experiment would be useful. Aspect's experiment certainly doens't imply any instantaneoud action.

Here's an Aspect-like experiment: Violation of Bell's inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions. Baez sure seems to think that these experiments cause trouble with IAD:

"QM suggests that if say the measurement of the photon 1 x-spin happens first, then this measurement must instantaneously force photon 2 into a state of ill-defined y-spin, even though it is light years away from photon 1. How do we reconcile the fact that photon 2 "knows" that the x-spin of photon 1 has been measured, even though they are separated by light years of space and far too little time has passed for information to have travelled to it according to the rules of special relativity? There are basically two choices. You can accept the postulates of QM as a fact of life, in spite of its seemingly uncomfortable coexistence with special relativity, or you can postulate that QM is not complete, that there was more information available for the description of the two-particle system at the time it was created, carried away by both photons, and that you just didn't know it because QM does not properly account for it."

Do you agree with Baez that QM has a "seemingly uncomfortable coexistence with special relativity", ie. instantaneous action at a distance? If not, why not?