Talk:Simulated optics experiment/Data analysis: Difference between revisions
Talk:Simulated optics experiment/Data analysis (view source)
Revision as of 14:01, 1 June 2023
, 1 year agono edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 28:
And, even so, I am certain it would not change minds of the strong adherents. --[[User:Chemoelectric|Chemoelectric]] ([[User talk:Chemoelectric|talk]]) 13:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
-- What is more, I am certain I could not convince strong adherents of "quantum magic" that equations (10), (11), and (12) of https://cds.cern.ch/record/142461/ are illicit, even though counterexamples to (10) are astoundingly trivial to devise. (''Please try to come up with them, if it please to do so. They can be totally facetious, and nevertheless will totally disprove Bell's reasoning, as mathematicians and logicians can attest. Counterexamples can involve magical clouds of heart attack spores, for instance.'')This is Bell's own most famous explanation of his "theorem". And that Bell's discussion on page 16, attempting to justify treating a and b as independent variables, is not even coherent. He seems to think it impossible for two values that have a common origin to require representation by functions of shared parameters, which shows he was strangely incompetent not only at mathematics but at common sense. If it were true, my brothers and I could not possibly have shared DNA! I further illustrate the bizarreness of Bell's reasoning, in the "Extra 'credit'" task. --[[User:Chemoelectric|Chemoelectric]] ([[User talk:Chemoelectric|talk]]) 14:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
| |||