Sci.Physics.Foundations

. In equation (9), I show that E(a,b) , the expectation over the angle (a,b) is the sum of the related expectations . This leads quickly to the refutation of Bell's theorem. Does this clash with Joy Christian's demonstration that "Bell's theorem is based on circular reasoning and thus a fundam...

. The 6-page PDF is freely available at https://www.academia.edu/s/4d1cdeaea5 Critical and other comments are welcome. Thanks, Gordon. Abstract: With Zeilinger (2011:194), “We do not assume the preexistence of observed values.” Instead, we work with commonsense local realism (CLR). CLR is the union ...

To Richard Gill and Joy Christian: WRT your debate, please define REALISM. There is no "debate". Richard D. Gill cannot do math ... <SNIP> As for "realism", it was defined by Einstein and Bell in the context of the Bohr-Einstein debate. Look it up. There is no debate regarding t...

To Richard Gill and Joy Christian: WRT your debate, please define REALISM. Thanks; Gordon Well, I will define realistic as it relates to the latest simulation. Give me 2D values for the vectors a and b and a 3D value for the singlet vector s then I will tell you what the outcomes are at A and B. IO...

To Richard Gill and Joy Christian: WRT your debate, please define REALISM.

Thanks; Gordon

Dear Gordon, I beg your pardon. I went over your paper and checked that for me it is unintelligible. So I can't have an opinion of it. Send it somewhere and let's see what the reviewers say. If it is well written and proves that Bell was wrong, start by sending it to Nature. Recently Eugene Muchows...

@Gordon What is the link to the paper and I will tell you? . Thanks Fred, A final version is on its way. This draft will get you started, for nothing technical changes: https://www.academia.edu/54714203/Bells_theorem_refuted_Einstein_and_locality_prevail Gordon First thing. Your introduction is ter...

FrediFizzx wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 4:08 pm @Gordon What is the link to the paper and I will tell you?
.

Thanks Fred,
A final version is on its way. This draft will get you started, for nothing technical changes:
https://www.academia.edu/54714203/Bells ... ty_prevail
Gordon

Dear Gordon, I beg your pardon. I went over your paper and checked that for me it is unintelligible. So I can't have an opinion of it. Send it somewhere and let's see what the reviewers say. If it is well written and proves that Bell was wrong, start by sending it to Nature. Recently Eugene Muchows...

I don't know if it will help but I have the impression that the problem is somehow semantics. The Bell theorem has hypotheses. I believe that Joy does claim the theorem is false because he says that given the hypothesis the result does not follow or that it has no physical meaning. I don't understa...

I don't know if it will help but I have the impression that the problem is somehow semantics. The Bell theorem has hypotheses. I believe that Joy does claim the theorem is false because he says that given the hypothesis the result does not follow or that it has no physical meaning. I don't understa...

. 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...

. 0. Titled "Bell's theorem refuted: Einstein and locality prevail", my theory has been discussed at http://www.sciphysicsforums.com/spfbb1/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=496 1. Therein I infer (in a commonsense notation against Bell 1964, and backed by many heuristics) to the following equation:...