by FrediFizzx » Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:16 pm
Gordon Watson wrote:Fred, given that we can match particle-pairs by coincidence-matching, why is "at the same time" relevant to the settings in your testing scenario?
In particular, if Joy's model integrates over the whole space of the HVs, you can simply set up 4 benches side-by-side and run all tests "at the same time" (near-enough), each test integrating over the whole HV space in each case. The 4 bench settings will be (a1-b1), (a1-b2), (a2-b1), (a2-b2).
Or am I missing something?
.
Yes... you are missing the difference between dependent expectation terms and independent terms. With the former, the bound is |2|. With the later the absolute bound is |4| and the QM bound is 2*sqrt(2). In the code above, A1 from the first term is the same A1 in the second term, etc. per particle pair. In your scenario of doing 4 separate experiments, A1 in the first term is not necessarily the same as the A1 in the second term, etc. for the B's. So it will have completely independent expectation terms with an absolute bound of |4|.
But in the code above, a1, a2, b1, and b2
are all happening at the same time which is impossible for an EPR-Bohm scenario.
But the bottom line is that Joy's model gets the same prediction as QM in the same "tricky" way for a CHSH-like string of terms. If your local-realistic model simply has a prediction of
-a.b, then that is all you really need.
.
[quote="Gordon Watson"]Fred, given that we can match particle-pairs by coincidence-matching, why is "[u]at the same time[/u]" relevant to [u]the settings[/u] in your testing scenario?
In particular, if Joy's model integrates over the whole space of the HVs, you can simply set up 4 benches side-by-side and run all tests "at the same time" (near-enough), each test integrating over the whole HV space in each case. The 4 bench settings will be (a1-b1), (a1-b2), (a2-b1), (a2-b2).
Or am I missing something?
.[/quote]
Yes... you are missing the difference between dependent expectation terms and independent terms. With the former, the bound is |2|. With the later the absolute bound is |4| and the QM bound is 2*sqrt(2). In the code above, A1 from the first term is the same A1 in the second term, etc. per particle pair. In your scenario of doing 4 separate experiments, A1 in the first term is not necessarily the same as the A1 in the second term, etc. for the B's. So it will have completely independent expectation terms with an absolute bound of |4|.
But in the code above, a1, a2, b1, and b2 [i]are[/i] all happening at the same time which is impossible for an EPR-Bohm scenario.
But the bottom line is that Joy's model gets the same prediction as QM in the same "tricky" way for a CHSH-like string of terms. If your local-realistic model simply has a prediction of [b]-a.b[/b], then that is all you really need.
.