Sci.Physics.Foundations

But logic and arithmetic surely also rule nature. 8-) Do you even understand the difference between ontology and epistemology? How could you suggest that "math and "logic" rule nature? You probably don't understand the distinction between those two concepts. I would recommend you rea...

The differences between ontology and epistemology are crucial to the way we interpret mathematics and logic. Very often statements are made which suggest that these concepts have not been properly understood by even sometimes the most "educated" people discussing the foundations of physic...

. 7. Since I am happy to address any and all serious objections directly, and since I am happy to propose any Bellian as a nominated referee, am I missing something here? Yes, you are missing something. There is no such word as "Bellian" in this context. The phrase is "Bell Fanatic&q...

You’re right. I looked again and saw yet more changes, both early and late in the code. You changed your three parameters and you now have an even more complicated model. At the end, you show the statistical deviations from the new simulated model. It clearly shows small systematic deviations from ...

I have discovered the "trick" Nature uses to produce the observed strong correlations. It takes the ability to do physics to discover and understand such tricks. That’s what you think. I think “everything is emptiness and chasing after the wind”. Meanwhile, Carpe diem, but do be kind to o...

I just posted a message over there. 11:43 AM (1 minute ago) to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations We dare you to come over to our new public forum to try to make Bell's case. You can post as a guest if you don't wish to sign up. Thanks. https://sciphysicsfoundations.com/index.php The non-Bel...

You’re right. I looked again and saw yet more changes, both early and late in the code. You changed your three parameters and you now have an even more complicated model. At the end, you show the statistical deviations from the new simulated model. It clearly shows small systematic deviations from t...

Yes, I saw the changes. Yes, the picture shows the negative cosine, exactly (up to numerical or graphical rounding errors). There is *no* statistical error at all. At the heart of the code you take the real part of the quaternion ab or the quaternion ba . In both cases, the result is a.b . You are f...

@gill1109 Nonsense that you have used to brainwash yourself for more than 40 years. Do you mean that maths is nonsense? :lol: :lol: :lol: I went up to Cambridge in 1974 to study physics, treading in the footsteps of my father. I joined Gonville and Caius College, the college of R.A. Fisher and John...

Your logic is incredible, Joy! You say that your very own RSOS paper [4] shows that Bell's inequalities can be derived without assuming either locality or realism??? You shot yourself in your own foot. Yes, the Bell inequalities depend on some assumptions. They can be violated by violating those ass...

@gill1109 Nonsense that you have used to brainwash yourself for more than 40 years. Do you mean that maths is nonsense? :lol: :lol: :lol: I went up to Cambridge in 1974 to study physics, treading in the footsteps of my father. I joined Gonville and Caius College, the college of R.A. Fisher and John...

Looks like you really think being impolite is a sign of strength? Being impolite is a sign of weakness. Those who have strong arguments have no necessity to cry around and claim victories. They know that theorems cannot be killed and therefore they don't care much about claimed theorem-killers. The...

... In Tsirelson’s mathematical proof of his famous inequality, the four terms are not independent. They depend on the same four observables (self-adjoint operators) A, A’, B, B’ and the same quantum state rho on the same Hilbert space H. When Tsirelson’s observables commute, his model is fully equ...

. Ok, guys, let us get back to the topic of this thread about the bait-and-switch fraud committed by all Bell-believers, for unscientific reasons. . It does not exist. There is no fraud. The folk who think Bell was right and repeat or even improve Bell’s arguments, genuinely believe he was right. O...

I just posted a message over there. 11:43 AM (1 minute ago) to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations We dare you to come over to our new public forum to try to make Bell's case. You can post as a guest if you don't wish to sign up. Thanks. https://sciphysicsfoundations.com/index.php The non-Bel...

@gill1109 Looks like all your Bell buddies are cowards and don't want to face the fact that they aren't really Bell fanatics any more. Some of my buddies think that Bell was right and some don’t. Probably none of them see any point in trying to communicate with you and your buddies. I seem to be th...

@gill1109 What physical wouldn't be geometric in origin? That’s a deep remark, Fred. I think you are right. :o But logic and arithmetic surely also rule nature. 8-) Or are you one of those people (like Andrei Nikulovich, and maybe also like the qBists) who say that we cannot understand nature? We c...

... OH... sorry. You were talking about the simulation of the product calculation I put up. The one that killed Bell's junk physics theory back in 2007. But what the hell are you talking about here, "Actually, every single one of them has the same real part." Sounds like drunken nonsense ...

Who won World War II? Who's going to win World War III? USA of course. Nobody cares about losing Vietnam or Afghanistan. S**t-hole places and money drains. Russia won World War II. Some other nations helped. Britain, for instance, had Alan Turing. Thanks to him, German submarine attacks on convoys ...