by Heinera » Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:20 pm
minkwe wrote:gill1109 wrote:minkwe wrote:For a while the Bell proponents have been asking for local simulations that match QM but nobody has asked them to produce non-local simulations that match QM and all the required conditions like no-signalling. I think looking at what they come up with and the difficulties they face will be instructive.
I'm in the process of coming up with a straight-forward full-proof test of no-signalling.stay tuned
Exciting!
Want to see a *non-local* simulation that matches QM and all required conditions? It goes like this
- Code: Select all
Repeat N times
Pick two settings a, b however you like
Pick two outcomes x, y from the joint probability distribution p(x, y | a, b) according to QM's EPR-B model.
Sorry, but in case you did not know, QM does not permit signalling like that. You can't use (a,b) together at any station to obtain outcomes. Otherwise, Alice and Bob can easily communicate using entanglement, which is forbidden. Go back to the drawing board.
Nope. Even with Richard's model, there is no way that Alice can signal to Bob (or vice versa) by using detector settings. No matter what setting Alice chooses, the probability distribution on Bob's end will still be 50/50. And of course if you had known even a whiff about quantum mechanics you would know that entanglement requires a distribution that depends on both a and b, but still is consistent with the no-signalling theorem.
For this model implemented in R see
https://rpubs.com/heinera/16727
[quote="minkwe"][quote="gill1109"][quote="minkwe"]
For a while the Bell proponents have been asking for local simulations that match QM but nobody has asked them to produce non-local simulations that match QM and all the required conditions like no-signalling. I think looking at what they come up with and the difficulties they face will be instructive.
I'm in the process of coming up with a straight-forward full-proof test of no-signalling.stay tuned[/quote]
Exciting!
Want to see a *non-local* simulation that matches QM and all required conditions? It goes like this
[code]
Repeat N times
Pick two settings a, b however you like
Pick two outcomes x, y from the joint probability distribution p(x, y | a, b) according to QM's EPR-B model.
[/code][/quote]
Sorry, but in case you did not know, QM does not permit signalling like that. You can't use (a,b) together at any station to obtain outcomes. Otherwise, Alice and Bob can easily communicate using entanglement, which is forbidden. Go back to the drawing board.[/quote]
Nope. Even with Richard's model, there is no way that Alice can signal to Bob (or vice versa) by using detector settings. No matter what setting Alice chooses, the probability distribution on Bob's end will still be 50/50. And of course if you had known even a whiff about quantum mechanics you would know that entanglement requires a distribution that depends on both a and b, but still is consistent with the no-signalling theorem.
For this model implemented in R see https://rpubs.com/heinera/16727