A New Paper by Professor Karl Hess on Bell's Theorem

Foundations of physics and/or philosophy of physics, and in particular, posts on unresolved or controversial issues

Re: A New Paper by Professor Karl Hess on Bell's Theorem

Postby gill1109 » Tue Mar 03, 2020 3:14 am

Joy Christian wrote:
Heinera wrote:
gill1109 wrote:Karl Hess is beginning to understand Bell's (impeccable) logic.

At least he now understands that Bell's theorem has everything to do with probabilities and statistics, unlike some other participants on this forum (who shall remain unnamed).

There are of course those who would like to deceive people by obfuscating a very simple physics issue by invoking probabilities and statistics because physics is not everyone's cup of tea. Bell's theorem is a fatally flawed argument, as I will demonstrate here by tomorrow. Bell and his followers have made a major boo-boo. But that is not easy for everyone to understand.

Statistics and probability certainly isn't everybody's cup of tea, I guess we can all agree on that. I think we are the most hated people in science.
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Re: A New Paper by Professor Karl Hess on Bell's Theorem

Postby barukcic » Mon Aug 17, 2020 9:08 am

Respected all,
Bell's article has been peer-reviewed and "published". Still, it is that what is was, what it is and what it will be:
pre logical and mathematical non-sense!
It is without any sense to take into consideration that Bell's theorem/inequality or CHSH et cetera is of any scientific value.
Bell's logical non-sense is refuted already since years and for several times and is more than only far away from the truth.
See:
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.4773147
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinfo ... erid=65864
http://jddtonline.info/index.php/jddt/article/view/2389
Best
Ilija Barukcic
barukcic
 

Re: A New Paper by Professor Karl Hess on Bell's Theorem

Postby gill1109 » Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:28 pm

barukcic wrote:Respected all,
Bell's article has been peer-reviewed and "published". Still, it is that what is was, what it is and what it will be:
pre logical and mathematical non-sense!
It is without any sense to take into consideration that Bell's theorem/inequality or CHSH et cetera is of any scientific value.
Bell's logical non-sense is refuted already since years and for several times and is more than only far away from the truth.
See:
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.4773147
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinfo ... erid=65864
http://jddtonline.info/index.php/jddt/article/view/2389
Best
Ilija Barukcic

Ilja, it is good that your works get published. Now the next question is, will they become highly cited? Will your results find their way into standard university textbooks?
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Previous

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 77 guests

cron
CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library