Coming Soon!

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

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Fri Oct 08, 2021 7:20 am

FrediFizzx wrote:
gill1109 wrote:One of the interesting things that I discovered at that Academia.edu website discussion (of a paper by our old friend Gordon Watson) was Fred’s simulation model in papers five years ago by Hess, de Raedt, Michielsen.

Do you have an exact reference for that or is this more nonsense?
.

Yep, must be more nonsense as expected.
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:14 am

Gill insinuates that you stole those authors' coincidence window model (not so). Too cowardly to come right out and say it. Typical stone-cold narc tactics. Gaslighting, muddying, and projection. In fact, Gill himself stole the coincidence window mechanism from the great Arthur Fine, and Gill doesn't cite his predecessors in the application of martingales. Despicable.
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:37 am

local wrote:Gill is insinuating that you stole those guys' coincidence window model (not so). He's too cowardly to come right out and say it. Typical stone-cold narc tactics all the way. Gaslighting, muddying, and projection. In fact, Gill himself stole the coincidence window mechanism from the great Arthur Fine. Despicable.

Yeah, I don't remember any by them that is like our models. The Bell fanatics can't come up with any legitimate NON-strawman argument against our models so all Gill can do is continue to spew nonsense. He's finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:41 am

He's the great mathematical statistician don't you know?
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:22 pm

I figured out how to get the other 360 degrees worth of data into the plot for the 3D vectors quaternion simulation. 1 million trials, one degree resolution.

Image

Cloud file.

https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fredif ... D-forum.nb

Direct files.

EPRsims/newCS-26-S3quat-3D-forum.pdf
EPRsims/newCS-26-S3quat-3D-forum.nb

Enjoy the super-duper awesome simulation that none of the Bell fanatics can prove wrong NON-strawman-wise so far! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby gill1109 » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:00 am

local wrote:Gill insinuates that you stole those authors' coincidence window model (not so). Too cowardly to come right out and say it. Typical stone-cold narc tactics. Gaslighting, muddying, and projection. In fact, Gill himself stole the coincidence window mechanism from the great Arthur Fine, and Gill doesn't cite his predecessors in the application of martingales. Despicable.


"local", who are my predecessors in the application of martingale theory to Bell experiments?

In my experience, by the way, people who descend into pseudo-psychiatric destruction of other scientists' behaviour tend to do that when they have entirely run out of scientific arguments. What a load of rubbish you are spouting! I'm not insinuating anything at all. I hope your weird accusations made you feel better.

As I posted a few days back, I was reading discussions of a paper of Gordon Watson on Academia.edu, this led me to look at quite a few more works of Bell denialists, which led me to a bunch of papers by Marian Kupcsynski, which led me to three papers by Hans de Raedt, Karl Hess and Kristel Michielsen. As you all know, Hans and his wife Kristel work on computer simulations of quantum physical models. They are very good at it. They have linked up with Karl Hess. I suggest that Joy and Fred take a good look at their recent works. In particular, they are modelling in a local realistic way the new generation of experiments. I don't agree with their findings and I notice that they quite misinterpret those experiments. In particular, they are still using the detection loophole and coincidence loophole and not processing the observed data (from a sequence of time-slots) in the way that the 2015 experimenters do.

I saw some striking similarities with Fred's model. Lots of people have come up with detection-loophole and coincidence-loophole models, as they nowadays are called. Of course, the discoverers do not give them those names. They argue they are exposing the true underlying physics. Possibly, in the case of early Bell experiments, they were right.

Jan-Åke Larsson and I tried to figure out what Hess and Philipp were up to, going on about time and micro time. The thing is, Bell *did* discuss the issue of time, and I had already showed in 2001 how one could take account of it using randomised settings and fixed time-slots. We wondered if Hess and Philipp were thinking about the way experimentalists used to create observations of pairs of events by whether or not they were separated by a small distance in time. We showed that this phenomenon opened up a way to simulate quantum correlations in a local realistic way, even more easily than the already well-known detection efficiency problem. We gave it a name. Karl Hess first denied it, then said we had stolen it from them, then said that it had been discovered by Sergio Paszacio (whom he had never cited in his works). OK, he was pissed off since we had already killed his PNAS papers. Because we had discovered the mistake in Philipp's enormous mathematical calculations, which, as Hess admitted, he had not checked in detail. It was quite outside his comfort zone. The mathematical core of Bell's work is quite correct, as most people are prepared to admit, including Hess, de Raedt, Joy Christian. The problem is the (meta)physical interpretation.

We certainly were inspired by Hess and Philpp's work and freely admitted it. I have later had pleasant interactions with Karl. It was very sad that Walter died so unexpectedly. He was a very good probabilist.

You can't have it both ways. Fine, Pearl, Pascazio showed how one could create quantum signature behaviour in a classical physical way. Fred and Joy are doing the same, and using techniques that mathematically are closely related. Joy himself has written that there is a certain mathematical similarity between one of his models with Pearl's model. Fred and Joy are free to interpret their work physically just how they like. Everybody else is free to study their methods and, if they like, to interpret it differently.

Experimentalists are now doing experiments with such a stringent protocol that Fred and Joy certainly cannot simulate those experiments in a local realistic way without changing the way the data collected is processed. Hess, de Raedt and Michielsen only succeed in doing simulations of post 2015 experiments by changing how the observed data is analysed. Obviously, they have to change something. They are attempting the impossible, so the way to succeed is by moving the goalposts.

If I read those papers again and find the model which struck my eye, I might mention it here on the forum. It looked interesting enough to write about in a future publication. But Marian Kupscynski himself has already written a critique of the Hess-de Raedt-Michielsen works. This is interesting, since he himself is a Bell-denier, publishing a lot of papers in quite decent journals. Probably it is better to leave it buried.
Last edited by gill1109 on Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:25 am

@gill1109 I should delete that pack of nonsense but since you responded to local, I will leave it to see if local wants to respond to your denialism.

Let's see you prove our simulation is wrong without the use of some kind of strawman model. Go for it Dude! You are finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby gill1109 » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:30 am

FrediFizzx wrote:@gill1109 I should delete that pack of nonsense but since you responded to local, I will leave it to see if local wants to respond to your denialism.
Let's see you prove our simulation is wrong without the use of some kind of strawman model. Go for it Dude! You are finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Indeed. "local" accused me of being a psychopath and a plagiarist. I'm glad I am allowed to respond. If he weren't anonymous and if he were an academic, I would submit a complaint to the appropriate "office of scientific integrity". If he has complaints about me he can write to Leiden University or to the KNAW (Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences. Founded in Napoleon's time by Napoleon's brother Louis). I would be happy to tell him the appropriate addresses.

To get back on topic: Who says your simulation is wrong, Fred? The simulation does what it does. It defines a classical computer algorithm. It defines a mathematical function. It can be studied using computer science and using mathematics.

The question is, what is it a simulation of? Does it have any relevance to physics, whether to theory or experiment? Publish it, and I may then well write and publish a critique, but hurry up, we're all not as young as we used to be.

Fred says it contradicts certain mathematical theorems or theories but it most certainly does not. You don't disprove a mathematical theorem by showing that if its assumptions do not hold, then the conclusion does not hold. That does not say that your new work is uninteresting. I'm following the developments here because I do find it interesting.
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:47 am

gill1109 wrote: ... and I may then well write and publish a critique, ...

:lol: You will be the laughing stock of the world. :lol: Face it. You are finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby gill1109 » Sat Oct 09, 2021 3:44 am

FrediFizzx wrote:
gill1109 wrote: ... and I may then well write and publish a critique, ...

:lol: You will be the laughing stock of the world. :lol: Face it. You are finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.

Fred, you are funny! :P
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sat Oct 09, 2021 5:15 am

gill1109 wrote:
FrediFizzx wrote:
gill1109 wrote: ... and I may then well write and publish a critique, ...

:lol: You will be the laughing stock of the world. :lol: Face it. You are finished! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.

Fred, you are funny! :P

I'll be laughing my ass off when you finally admit Bell was wrong. All those theorems you thought were theorems are merely theories with their sides blown out. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Sat Oct 09, 2021 5:18 am

Gill is lying. I never called him a psychopath as he claimed. Narcissism and psychopathy are not the same thing. The guy is so full of himself he had to invent and brag about his connection to Napoleon's brother. He can't help himself.
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby gill1109 » Sat Oct 09, 2021 7:51 am

local wrote:Gill is lying. I never called him a psychopath as he claimed. Narcissism and psychopathy are not the same thing. The guy is so full of himself he had to invent and brag about his connection to Napoleon's brother. He can't help himself.


Dear "local", you said: "Typical stone-cold narc tactics. Gaslighting, muddying, and projection." You called me a narcicist. I suspect that it is against the rules of this forum to resort to personal slander. It is proper to make a "good faith" assumption. If you didn't understand me then you shouldn't by default accuse me of wrong doing. You could instead ask for clarification.

Actually, I was not aware of the abbreviation "narc", it made me think of narcotics. Narcicism is indeed not quite the same thing as psychopathy, as defined by the DSM-V. Lists of symptoms which are used to put labels on people so that the pharmaceutical industry can sell medicines to "treat" them, and courts of law have got reasons not to have people executed for murder but instead to send them to psychiatric hospital for the rest of their lives.

Clearly, you don't appreciate British humour. My connection to Napoleon's brother is a joke! The Dutch academy of sciences was founded when the French were in control here. I wanted to make sure that you did not think I was boasting by explaining the "K" in "KNAW". Here's another joke: I am Charles Darwin's third cousin, four times removed! So you better watch what you say to me. One of my ancestors sailed to America on the Mayflower, but his grandson came back to England again! I can trace my ancestry back to Charlemagne, but you know, the legally recognised parents of many children are not the biological parents, so this is not very surprising.
Last edited by FrediFizzx on Sat Oct 09, 2021 8:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: some nonsense deleted
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Sat Oct 09, 2021 8:09 am

Gill admits to lying but does not apologize. Narcissists never apologize. Then he of course seizes the opportunity to further brag about himself, pretending it is just a humorous joke. As I said, the guy cannot help himself.

Now he's harrassing me via PM.
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sat Oct 09, 2021 8:41 am

local wrote:Gill admits to lying but does not apologize. Narcissists never apologize. Then he of course seizes the opportunity to further brag about himself, pretending it is just a humorous joke. As I said, the guy cannot help himself.

Now he's harrassing me via PM.

Yeah, he's gone off his rails. His elevator doesn't go to the top anymore. :D That denial stuff gets you every time.
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Sat Oct 09, 2021 9:47 am

FrediFizzx wrote: His elevator doesn't go to the top anymore.

Not so sure it ever did. ;)
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sun Oct 10, 2021 2:25 am

FrediFizzx wrote:I figured out how to get the other 360 degrees worth of data into the plot for the 3D vectors quaternion simulation. 1 million trials, one degree resolution.

Image

Cloud file.

https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fredif ... D-forum.nb

Direct files.

EPRsims/newCS-26-S3quat-3D-forum.pdf
EPRsims/newCS-26-S3quat-3D-forum.nb

Enjoy the super-duper awesome simulation that none of the Bell fanatics can prove wrong NON-strawman-wise so far! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Gill was asking what is it a simulation of? It is a simulation of Nature and how Nature might work.
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby FrediFizzx » Sun Oct 10, 2021 1:45 pm

That it is a true simulation of Nature is probably why none of the Bell fans have been able to find anything wrong with the simulation without presenting some other strawman model.
.
FrediFizzx
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm
Location: N. California, USA

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby local » Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:51 am

The guy thinks we're all hanging on what he thinks is enjoyable or "delightful". Nobody cares!

"Dear Joy"

Already condescending.

If you want to understand this guy, read all four parts beginning here:

https://litfl.com/pimping-in-perspective/

Pimper or pimpee, you decide.
local
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Coming Soon!

Postby gill1109 » Fri Oct 15, 2021 5:53 am

local wrote:The guy thinks we're all hanging on what he thinks is enjoyable or "delightful". Nobody cares!

"Dear Joy"

Already condescending.

If you want to understand this guy, read all four parts beginning here:

https://litfl.com/pimping-in-perspective/

Pimper or pimpee, you decide.


Many thanks, "local"! That's a brilliant series of posts.

The author distinguishes between malevolent pimping and benevolent pimping. The author shows how the pimpee can pretty easily turn the situation to their advantage. Plenty of useful advice for "local"! And of course, good advice for me, too. In fact, good advice for all.

I learn from this that "local"'s feelings were badly hurt and that it would have been smart of me to apologise for that, much faster. Well, I did already know that, and I certainly do apologise. It certainly was not malevolent on my part. My problem is that in the meantime, "local" has been pretty deliberately hurting my feelings. I try just to turn the other cheek, but I do notice, and I can't exactly forget.

Maybe time for apologies all round?
gill1109
Mathematical Statistician
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: Leiden

PreviousNext

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ahrefs [Bot] and 8 guests

cron
CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library