Joy Christian wrote:.
Great work, Fred. But I will have to see the analytical functions A(a, h1, h2) and B(b, h1, h2) written down explicitly to believe it. Here h1 and h2 are your two hidden variables.
Joy Christian wrote:.
Great work, Fred. But I will have to see the analytical functions A(a, h1, h2) and B(b, h1, h2) written down explicitly to believe it. Here h1 and h2 are your two hidden variables.
.
Joy Christian wrote:.
Brilliant, Fred. I suggest you ask Jay to have it patented, immediately. You know there is that person who goes around first trashing and then stealing other people's work.
But first check that << A >> = 0 and << B >> = 0.
.
FrediFizzx wrote:Joy Christian wrote:.
Brilliant, Fred. I suggest you ask Jay to have it patented, immediately. You know there is that person who goes around first trashing and then stealing other people's work.
But first check that << A >> = 0 and << B >> = 0.
.
Jay already told me that you can't really patent stuff like this but it is time stamped on the forum here. But I'm going to try to simplify some more anyways.
.
jreed wrote:Fred, could you post the Mathematica code when you get a final version so I see how it works?
FrediFizzx wrote:Here is a better CHSH example Mathematic notebook file with more standard angles.
EPRsims/bingo2CHSH2.nb
CHSH = 2.89823! In fact we have exceeded the QM bound but of course this is not a QM model.
Enjoy! Bell is shot down all to pieces now! Finished! Kaput!
FrediFizzx wrote:Here is a new version where I have expanded out a-b to cover the whole range of data to 720 degrees.
…
I've now got 25 adjustable parameters that I can use to tweak it even more. Here are the PDF and Mathematica notebook files.
EPRsims/posneg_forum2.pdf
EPRsims/posneg_forum.nb
Enjoy! Next I will be doing this with 3 separate Do loops for the particle and HV generation and then independent ones for A and B.
Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests