Experimental assessment of physical realism

[HariTulsidas]

"We show that, in disparity with previous proposals, our setup ensures a formal link between the output visibility and elements of reality within the interferometer.

An experimental proof-of-principle is provided for a two-spin-1/2 system in an interferometric setup implemented in a nuclear magnetic resonance platform.

We discuss how our results validate, to a great extent, Bohr’s original formulation of the complementarity principle and unveil morphing reality states."

See: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42005-022-00828-z#Sec5

Does this paper exactly indicate there is a chance for physical realisim?

[Soul_of_Shu]

"We show that, in disparity with previous proposals, our setup ensures a formal link between the output visibility and elements of reality within the interferometer.

An experimental proof-of-principle is provided for a two-spin-1/2 system in an interferometric setup implemented in a nuclear magnetic resonance platform.

We discuss how our results validate, to a great extent, Bohr’s original formulation of the complementarity principle and unveil morphing reality states."

See: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42005-022-00828-z#Sec5

Does this paper exactly indicate there is a chance for physical realisim?

Hari ... I'm going to let this topic go through, but as the paper, insofar as I can tell, makes no claim that it is attempting to resolve the question of how physicalism accounts for the experiences of consciousness, I'm not seeing much basis for discussion in a forum that is focused on exploring explications of such experiences.

However, if you know of some theory/model regarding how consciousness is emergent, and you feel that this paper supports it, then perhaps you can explain how that is the case, as a way into some discussion.

Also, I may move it to the 'general' section, since it doesn't seem to pertain specifically to BK's model.

[HariTulsidas]

Many thanks for allowing this topic. Bernardo and others have argued that the violation of Bell and Legget inequalities is solid experimental proof against physical realism. This paper implies that they have the empirical evidence for physical realism. Is it a valid claim? I am unsure and will be grateful if someone can explain whether this claim is valid.

You are right; this paper does not make any claims regarding the emergence of consciousness. The point is only that matter can exist non-contextually. If true (and I am not convinced this could be true), this will have significant implications for idealism, the way Bernardo models it. I may be wrong.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Many thanks for allowing this topic. Bernardo and others have argued that the violation of Bell and Legget inequalities is solid experimental proof against physical realism. This paper implies that they have the empirical evidence for physical realism. Is it a valid claim? I am unsure and will be grateful if someone can explain whether this claim is valid.

You are right; this paper does not make any claims regarding the emergence of consciousness. The point is only that matter can exist non-contextually. If true (and I am not convinced this could be true), this will have significant implications for idealism, the way Bernardo models it. I may be wrong.

Ok, now I see your point, and its relevance to BK's assertion. Of course, he should be the one to address your question, if it can somehow be put to him. I certainly don't have enough grasp of the ideas to offer any clarification. Hopefully someone else can.