Joy Christian wrote:***
Thanks, Fred and Michel, for your congratulations.
I should mention that IEEE journals do not retract papers once they are published. They are not insecure like Annals of Physics. So, try as some will, that trick is not going to work this time.
***
minkwe wrote:
I particularly enjoyed the Q&A section at the end. It was great of the editors to allow that to be included. Every paper should have one.
Joy Christian wrote:minkwe wrote:
I particularly enjoyed the Q&A section at the end. It was great of the editors to allow that to be included. Every paper should have one.
Yes, that was a great suggestion by the editors. The extensive review process brought up some good questions and they thought that my answers to them would benefit the community.
***
Joy Christian wrote:***
Many thanks, Fred. Yes, please, post the codes.
***
//Adaptation of Albert Jan Wonnink's original code based on GAViewer for Joy Christian's S^3 Model
//of the 2-particle correlation via Complete States Function.
function getRandomLambda()
{
if( rand()>0.5) {return 1;} else {return -1;}
}
function getRandomUnitVector() //uniform random unit vector:
//http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SpherePointPicking.html
{
v=randGaussStd()*e1+randGaussStd()*e2+ randGaussStd()*e3; //3D Vectors
return normalize(v);
}
batch test()
{
set_window_title("3D Test of Complete States GA S^3 Model for the 2-particle correlation");
default_model(p3ga);
N=400000; //number of iterations (trials)
I=e1^e2^e3;
ss=0;
t=0;
u=0;
for(nn=0;nn<N;nn=nn+1) //perform the experiment N times
{
a=getRandomUnitVector();
Da=I a;
b=getRandomUnitVector();
Db=I b;
e=getRandomUnitVector(); //singlet spin vector 3D
s=rand()*pi; //complete states function
z=-1+2/(sqrt(1+3*s/pi));
if(a.e>0) {S1=Da;} else {S1=-Da;} //polarizer takes S1 to +/-Da
if(b.e>0) {S2=Db;} else {S2=-Db;} //polarizer takes S2 to +/-Db
lambda=getRandomLambda(); //lambda is a fair coin, giving the +1 or -1 choice
if(abs(a.e)<z) {A=0;} else {A=(Da*lambda*(-S1));} //A=0 means "no state"
if(abs(b.e)<z) {B=0;} else {B=(lambda*S2*Db);} //B=0 means "no state"
q=0;
if(lambda==1) {q=(Da (-S2))(S2 Db);} else {q=(Db S1)((-S1) Da);}
ss=ss+q;
p_a=atan2(scalar(Da/(e3^e1)), scalar(Da/(e2^e3))); //Get angle for a vector in x-y plane
p_b=atan2(scalar(Db/(e2^e3)), scalar(Db/(e3^e1))); //Get angle for b vector in x-y plane
//neg_adotb=-(a.b);
//print(neg_adotb, "f"); //Outputs -a.b event by event
if(p_a*p_b>0) {theta=acos(a.b)*180/pi;} else {theta=-acos(a.b)*180/pi+360;}
print(theta, "f"); //Output the angles event by event
//print(correlation=scalar(q), "f"); //Output the correlations event by event
print(A);
print(B);
t=t+A;
u=u+B;
}
mean=ss/N;
print(mean, "f"); //shows the vanishing of the non-scalar part
aveA=t/N;
print(aveA, "f"); //verifies that individual average < A > = 0
aveB=u/N;
print(aveB, "f"); //verifies that individual average < B > = 0
prompt();
}
Joy Christian wrote:Thanks, Fred and Michel, for your congratulations.
I should mention that IEEE journals do not retract papers once they are published. They are not insecure like Annals of Physics. So, try as some will, that trick is not going to work this time.
gill1109 wrote:
I do wonder when you are going to thank me for my own positive contributions ...
Joy Christian wrote:gill1109 wrote:I do wonder when you are going to thank me for my own positive contributions ...
Your contribution to my 3-sphere model has been acknowledged in the IEEE paper.
FrediFizzx wrote:Yes, I liked the Q&A section in Appendix B also. For the simulation, I programmed the complete states function in GAViewer for the GA model and then outputted the +/-1 data for A, B and theta. Then copied and pasted into Word so I could format the data into lines that could be imported into Excel. Then saved as a .csv file that then was imported into Mathematica for data analysis. Here is the result for about 200K worth of events.
CHSH = 2.73098
I will post the code for GAViewer and Mathematica if anyone is interested.
.
gill1109 wrote:
Michel, where did you get your ideas from? You published your computer code, which was enough for me to work out the mathematical model which you were using, but (AFAIK) you never published any mathematical theory or literature references.
FrediFizzx wrote:Not sure why you care about this so much? You must think that Joy was right all along that Bell's junk physic theory is just that. Junk physics. Guess what? It is.
.
Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 95 guests