QM Local Prediction Simulation

[FrediFizzx]

Inspired by Joy's updated 3-Sphere model, here is proof that quantum mechanics itself can give the -a.b prediction in a completely local way. If you add the spinorial sign change corrections to the A and B outcomes, then you will have a 100 percent realistic model for QM. Since the cross products, r1 and r2, cancel automatically in the matrix calculations, they had to be added back in manually. 20,000 trials.


Blue is the correlation data, magenta is the -cosine curve for an exact match.

Cloud File.

https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fredif ... _forum3.nb

Direct Files.

sims/QMprod_calc_forum3.pdf
sims/QMprod_calc_forum3.nb

Enjoy!
.

[FrediFizzx]

Inspired by Joy's updated 3-Sphere model, here is proof that quantum mechanics itself can give the -a.b prediction in a completely local way. If you add the spinorial sign change corrections to the A and B outcomes, then you will have a 100 percent realistic model for QM. Since the cross products, r1 and r2, cancel automatically in the matrix calculations, they had to be added back in manually. 20,000 trials.


Blue is the correlation data, magenta is the -cosine curve for an exact match.

Cloud File.

https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fredif ... _forum3.nb

Direct Files.

sims/QMprod_calc_forum3.pdf
sims/QMprod_calc_forum3.nb

Enjoy!

What I posted here is the short-cut version. This actually only works if you invoke S^3 topology and use quaternions along with the Pauli Matrices. The Pauli matrix calculations just give you the cosine but there is still a cross product between the particle vector and detection polarizer angle. So, that means you have a scalar plus a vector for A and B. I'll post an updated version soon.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Here are the LOCAL quantum mechanical analytical measurement functions for A and B.



And we can see in the second step of the functions we have quaternions that are defined in the first step. So, the product calculation prediction proceeds exactly like in Joy's updated 3-Sphere model except for s1 = -s2. Thus we have proof that the quantum mechanical prediction of -a.b has a local solution. Finally!!!
.

[gill1109]

Taking limits as the dummy variable s1 converges to the limit sign(a.s1)a while s2 converges to the limit sign(b.s2)b and moreover s1 = -s2 is non-sense. Or more accurately, it is not a legal operation in calculus. It's not defined in mathematics. It is meaningless.

Anyway, whether it is a local solution or not depends on what you mean by local. And what you mean by solution. You are talking in a private language.

[FrediFizzx]

Taking limits as the dummy variable s1 converges to the limit sign(a.s1)a while s2 converges to the limit sign(b.s2)b and moreover s1 = -s2 is non-sense. Or more accurately, it is not a legal operation in calculus. It's not defined in mathematics. It is meaningless.

Anyway, whether it is a local solution or not depends on what you mean by local. And what you mean by solution. You are talking in a private language.

Ignorance is curable; stupid is forever. And..., you keep reminding us of that. So, thanks for that. As usual, you are talking complete nonsense. Not sure why I didn't just delete your post full of utter junk. Ah..., it is so other people can see how ridiculous you are.

Code: Select all

In[94]:= r0 = Limit[(b1[[1]].s2[[1]]) Cross[a, s3], s3 -> a];
r0
Out[95]= {0., 0., 0.}

Paper is forthcoming.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Here is the complete simulation for the validation of the local QM product calculation prediction.




And the notebook file for those that might be interested.

sims/Local-QMprod_calc_forum.nb
.

[FrediFizzx]

Here is the complete simulation for the validation of the local QM product calculation prediction.




And the notebook file for those that might be interested.

sims/Local-QMprod_calc_forum.nb

Now, you could take the singlet vector, "s", to be the hidden variable but QM knows about it so not very hidden. What actually completes QM in this scenario is S^3 topology. It is the hidden "variable".
.

[FrediFizzx]

I messed up a little bit. Sigma s1 and sigma s2 should be up in the first Do-loop instead of in the A and B Do-loops but it works the same either way.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Gill, your nonsense post about limits was deleted. I think we have enough of your stupidity about that on display already.

So, we found out from this local exercise that quantum mechanics is completed by S^3 topology. There doesn't appear to be some kind of single hidden variable that does the trick. That explains a lot.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Here is a PDF draft of the paper "Local Quantum Mechanical Prediction of the Singlet State" for the simulation.

sims/Local_QM_Prediction_for_EPR_Bohm_Draft.pdf

No-nonsense comments and questions welcomed.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Here is a PDF draft of the paper "Local Quantum Mechanical Prediction of the Singlet State" for the simulation.

sims/Local_QM_Prediction_for_EPR_Bohm_Draft.pdf

No-nonsense comments and questions welcomed.

So, Nature is local for the EPR-Bohm scenario even using QM completed by 3-Sphere topology. Bell should have checked that before spewing his junk physics theory. The Bell fanatics are finished for sure now!
.

[FrediFizzx]

Wow! I discovered this morning that the Clifford algebra package for Mathematica can do quaternions also. So, now we can do quaternions and geometric algebra mixed in the same simulation! I'm stoked!




Now, Lr0 is in the simulation. Fantastic!

Notebook File.

sims/Local-QMprod_calc_test5.nb
.

[FrediFizzx]

Updated paper proving that QM is local for the EPR-Bohm scenario.

sims/QM_is_local_for_EPR_Bohm_3_24.pdf
.

[gill1109]

Congratulations, Fred! I hope you will keep us posted on publication or pre-publication progress.

[FrediFizzx]

Congratulations, Fred! I hope you will keep us posted on publication or pre-publication progress.

I'm not going to bother publishing it other than on the forum and preprint servers because journals rarely publish papers by independent researchers. It can be peer-reviewed right here on the forum. So, if you have any no-nonsense comments or questions, go for it or even write a comment paper if you wish. This is the SPF journal. But a lot of the credit goes to Joy's updated 3-Sphere model.
.

[gill1109]

OK! Well, you’ve had my comments before. Mathematica’s algorithm for computing a limit is the wrong algorithm for this application. It uses the discrete topology instead of the usual topology on R^3, because it is based primarily on doing formal formula manipulations, not on doing numerical computations.

This means it actually reproduces typical schoolboy errors in some cases!

[FrediFizzx]

OK! Well, you’ve had my comments before. Mathematica’s algorithm for computing a limit is the wrong algorithm for this application. It uses the discrete topology instead of the usual topology on R^3, because it is based primarily on doing formal formula manipulations, not on doing numerical computations.

You're a freakin' stupid idiot or just plain very dishonest. Even my MathCad program also knows how to do a limit replacement function so it has nothing to do with Mathematica. And has everything to do with your defective brain.



Any further stupid schoolboy nonsense about the limit replacement functions will be deleted.
.

[FrediFizzx]

OK! Well, you’ve had my comments before. Mathematica’s algorithm for computing a limit is the wrong algorithm for this application. It uses the discrete topology instead of the usual topology on R^3, because it is based primarily on doing formal formula manipulations, not on doing numerical computations.

You're a freakin' stupid idiot or just plain very dishonest. Even my MathCad program also knows how to do a limit replacement function so it has nothing to do with Mathematica. And has everything to do with your defective brain.



Any further stupid schoolboy nonsense about the limit replacement functions will be deleted.

For any lurkers that might be following this, you can think of the limit replacement function as like a Fourier transform where one variable is swapped for another. Perhaps we should simply call it a "limit transform" and it is a very valid mathematical operation contrary to what Gill would have you believe. Physically, the limit transform represents the action of the detection polarizers with the particle spin.
.

[gill1109]

OK! Well, you’ve had my comments before. Mathematica’s algorithm for computing a limit is the wrong algorithm for this application. It uses the discrete topology instead of the usual topology on R^3, because it is based primarily on doing formal formula manipulations, not on doing numerical computations.

You're a freakin' stupid idiot or just plain very dishonest. Even my MathCad program also knows how to do a limit replacement function so it has nothing to do with Mathematica. And has everything to do with your defective brain.

Any further stupid schoolboy nonsense about the limit replacement functions will be deleted.

For any lurkers that might be following this, you can think of the limit replacement function as like a Fourier transform where one variable is swapped for another. Perhaps we should simply call it a "limit transform" and it is a very valid mathematical operation contrary to what Gill would have you believe. Physically, the limit transform represents the action of the detection polarizers with the particle spin.

Interesting. What do Mathematica and MathCad have to say about "lim_{x to 0} sin(x) / x"?

[FrediFizzx]

...
Interesting. What do Mathematica and MathCad have to say about "lim_{x to 0} sin(x) / x"?

That is just the cursor bar at the end of that last x.
.