Q-reeus wrote:So instead of this seemingly endless grizzling over unfair treatment for your theory papers Joy, isn't it high time to get a reliable simulation done and settle it once and for all?
Here's one possible starting point I found rather quickly:
http://newtondynamics.com/forum/newton.php
My "grizzling" is not over the unfair treatment of my theory papers. Many new ideas in physics receive similar unfair treatment, including those of Einstein and other eventually successful physicists. No, my "grizzling" is over the academic thuggery, outright dishonesty, personal attacks, and dirty politics employed by some of the two-faced detractors of my work, both online and behind the scenes. For example, as John Duffield put it
in another thread, "How on Earth are academics like Scott Aaronson allowed to spray such obnoxious bile and remain in post?"
As for your suggestions for a computer simulation of
my proposed experiment, there are several issues to consider: In the context of Bell's theorem computer simulations are a red herring. Bell's claim is an analytical claim, concerning a real physical experiment, not its computer simulation. That is why such a huge amount of money has been spent on the actual EPR-Bohm type experiments over the past 56 years. And even if computer simulations of such experiments are successful, they prove nothing. Because in the end computer simulations are merely a game, not the real thing. And if the computer simulations are unsuccessful, then they give all sorts of excuses to the detractors to undermine the theory. We have seen that already, even for successful simulations of my model presented in
this paper. They are attacked on specious grounds. Those who do not want to accept the theory will always find some excuse to do so.
***