Coming Soon!

[FrediFizzx]

I'm not sure why all you Bell fans are still sticking to it. ??? Bell's junk physics theory has been shot down dead since 2007. The quaternion version of the simulation has driven several nails into the coffin of the dead theory now so no reason to stick to the pile of junk anymore.
.

[gill1109]

In the quaternion model we have two lambdas but they are both functions of e(theta).

Is the quaternion model a different model from the model implemented by your recent Mathematica code? Two models, or one model? There were no quaternions in Joy's analytical formulas in earlier versions of your joint paper.

It is essentially the same model but with the addition of quaternions so that we could also have the product calculation at the same time and the 5 percent of A and B sign changes linked directly to quaternion flips. No more emulation! The paper has not been updated yet but will be eventually.

OK. In the meantime, John Reed and I pretty well understand your most recent published Mathematica code. I will wait for new versions of paper and code, before redoing our experiments and reporting on the results.

[FrediFizzx]

It is essentially the same model but with the addition of quaternions so that we could also have the product calculation at the same time and the 5 percent of A and B sign changes linked directly to quaternion flips. No more emulation! The paper has not been updated yet but will be eventually.

OK. In the meantime, John Reed and I pretty well understand your most recent published Mathematica code. I will wait for new versions of paper and code, before redoing our experiments and reporting on the results.

There is no change to the analytical formulas in the current paper except for the removal of "emulates" in eqs. (19) and (26). So, there is no reason to wait. John certainly should understand the code for the quaternions as some of it came from him. And... you can always ask a question. Just don't load it up with other nonsense.
.

[Joy Christian]

John certainly should understand the code for the quaternions as some of it came from him.

I thought the code with quaternions originally came from Chantal Roth: https://rpubs.com/chenopodium/516072.

However, it was several years ago so I have forgotten who did the code with the quaternions first.

In case Chantal did it first, then we should give her credit in the code and the paper when we update the paper with the new code.
.

[FrediFizzx]

John certainly should understand the code for the quaternions as some of it came from him.

I thought the code with quaternions originally came from Chantal Roth: https://rpubs.com/chenopodium/516072.

However, it was several years ago so I have forgotten who did the code with the quaternions first.

In case Chantal did it first, then we should give her credit in the code and the paper when we update the paper with the new code.

It says right in the R code that it came from John.
.

[Joy Christian]

John certainly should understand the code for the quaternions as some of it came from him.

I thought the code with quaternions originally came from Chantal Roth: https://rpubs.com/chenopodium/516072.

However, it was several years ago so I have forgotten who did the code with the quaternions first.

In case Chantal did it first, then we should give her credit in the code and the paper when we update the paper with the new code.

It says right in the R code that it came from John.

It seems to say Chantal translated the code from John's Mathematica code. Which one? John may remember from his records. I will search my email correspondence with Chantal.
.

[FrediFizzx]

@Joy Here is when John presented the quaternion code.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=389&p=9423&hilit=quaternion#p9402
.

[Joy Christian]

@Joy Here is when John presented the quaternion code.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=389&p=9423&hilit=quaternion#p9402

Ok, thanks. So we should cite this link in the paper when we update it.
.

[FrediFizzx]

Off-topic posts were moved to,

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=472&start=20#p14336
.

[jreed]

I wrote the quaternion notebook to do a simulation of Joy's paper. Here is a comment from the program:
(* Quaternion simulation of two level entangled state from "Quantum \
Correlations are Weaved by the Spinors of the Euclidean Primitives"
III B 1 *)

The main reason I did this was to learn how to handle quaternions in Mathematica. It worked out well. I'm now working with a Clifford algebra package. I think Clifford algebra is more useful than Mathematica for these kind of problems.

[FrediFizzx]

I wrote the quaternion notebook to do a simulation of Joy's paper. Here is a comment from the program:
(* Quaternion simulation of two level entangled state from "Quantum \
Correlations are Weaved by the Spinors of the Euclidean Primitives"
III B 1 *)

The main reason I did this was to learn how to handle quaternions in Mathematica. It worked out well. I'm now working with a Clifford algebra package. I think Clifford algebra is more useful than Mathematica for these kind of problems.

Yes, the quaternions are working out extremely well. Thanks for your original post for them. Did you actually mean Clifford Algebra is more useful than quaternions? Essentially they are the same thing and the Clifford package I am using is really slow.
.

[FrediFizzx]

A revised version of the quaternion simulation. I moved the product calculation to the end and did it a different way. And some notation changes. I changed e to and some other notation changes. The Cloud file,

https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fredif ... -forum3.nb



Product calculation 100,000 trials. No surprise... an exact match again. Here are the files,

EPRsims/newCS-15-S3quat-prodcalc-forum3.pdf
EPRsims/newCS-15-S3quat-prodcalc-forum3.nb

Again, enjoy its awesomeness!
.

[gill1109]

I wrote the quaternion notebook to do a simulation of Joy's paper. Here is a comment from the program:
(* Quaternion simulation of two level entangled state from "Quantum \
Correlations are Weaved by the Spinors of the Euclidean Primitives"
III B 1 *)

The main reason I did this was to learn how to handle quaternions in Mathematica. It worked out well. I'm now working with a Clifford algebra package. I think Clifford algebra is more useful than Mathematica for these kind of problems.

Yes, the quaternions are working out extremely well. Thanks for your original post for them. Did you actually mean Clifford Algebra is more useful than quaternions? Essentially they are the same thing and the Clifford package I am using is really slow.
.

Indeed essentially the same thing, but more precisely, one is a special case of the other.

The quaternion algebra is one particular Clifford algebra. Cl(0, 2)(R).

A general Clifford algebra package comes with a whole lot of facilities in order to handle all possible Clifford algebras. So if you just want quaternions the package could be much smaller and faster. I expect that nowadays Python users have created some really fast packages for all this stuff. GAViewer hasn’t been updated for a long, long time and is only available in 32 bit Windows mode, last time I looked.

[FrediFizzx]

GAviewer has basically hit the dust bin since can do Clifford on Mathematica.
.

[FrediFizzx]

@gill1109 I hope you meant Cl(0,3)(R). Hmm... I just found out that Microsoft has a version of R that is better.

https://mran.microsoft.com/
.

[jreed]

I wrote the quaternion notebook to do a simulation of Joy's paper. Here is a comment from the program:
(* Quaternion simulation of two level entangled state from "Quantum \
Correlations are Weaved by the Spinors of the Euclidean Primitives"
III B 1 *)

The main reason I did this was to learn how to handle quaternions in Mathematica. It worked out well. I'm now working with a Clifford algebra package. I think Clifford algebra is more useful than Mathematica for these kind of problems.

Yes, the quaternions are working out extremely well. Thanks for your original post for them. Did you actually mean Clifford Algebra is more useful than quaternions? Essentially they are the same thing and the Clifford package I am using is really slow.
.

Yes, I did mean Clifford algebra is more useful than quaternions. The reason I believe this is that if one wants to go to higher dimensions, needed for relativistic quantum mechanics for example, there is no way that this can be done with quaternions that I'm aware of. It's easy with Clifford algebra. Read the book by David Hestenes "Space-Time Algebra".

[FrediFizzx]

...
Yes, the quaternions are working out extremely well. Thanks for your original post for them. Did you actually mean Clifford Algebra is more useful than quaternions? Essentially they are the same thing and the Clifford package I am using is really slow.
.

Yes, I did mean Clifford algebra is more useful than quaternions. The reason I believe this is that if one wants to go to higher dimensions, needed for relativistic quantum mechanics for example, there is no way that this can be done with quaternions that I'm aware of. It's easy with Clifford algebra. Read the book by David Hestenes "Space-Time Algebra".

Yes, for sure. I just meant they are the same for quaternions compared to the 3D GA via Clifford algebra. Yeah, Space-Time Algebra is very cool. Only dabbled in it a tiny bit so far.
.

[gill1109]

@gill1109 I hope you meant Cl(0,3)(R). Hmm... I just found out that Microsoft has a version of R that is better.

https://mran.microsoft.com/
.

I really did mean Cl(0, 2)(R). As a real vector space, it has dimension 4. You have the scalar 1. Then you have the two generating basis elements e1, e2 which by definition square to -1. The cute thing is that it then turns out that their product e1 e2 also squares to -1, and that this set of three elements anticommute with one another. Easy to check.

"Cl_{0,2}(R) is a four-dimensional algebra spanned by {1, e1, e2, e1e2}. The latter three elements all square to −1 and anticommute, and so the algebra is isomorphic to the quaternions H."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_algebra

Fred, you were thinking of the even subalgebra of Cl(0, 3)(R), which is also isomorphic to the quaternion algebra.

[FrediFizzx]

@gill1109 I hope you meant Cl(0,3)(R). Hmm... I just found out that Microsoft has a version of R that is better.

https://mran.microsoft.com/
.

I really did mean Cl(0, 2)(R). As a real vector space, it has dimension 4. You have the scalar 1. Then you have the two generating basis elements e1, e2 which by definition square to -1. The cute thing is that it then turns out that their product e1 e2 also squares to -1, and that this set of three elements anticommute with one another. Easy to check.

"Cl_{0,2}(R) is a four-dimensional algebra spanned by {1, e1, e2, e1e2}. The latter three elements all square to −1 and anticommute, and so the algebra is isomorphic to the quaternions H."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_algebra

Fred, you were thinking of the even subalgebra of Cl(0, 3)(R), which is also isomorphic to the quaternion algebra.

"In this section, Hamilton's quaternions are constructed as the even sub algebra of the Clifford algebra Cl(0,3)(R)." Not thinking about but what I was talking about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_ ... uaternions
.

[gill1109]

@gill1109 I hope you meant Cl(0,3)(R). Hmm... I just found out that Microsoft has a version of R that is better.
https://mran.microsoft.com/

Great! I don’t know about *better*. Maybe, better for you if you are working on a Windows computer

I will try it out, on my virtual Windows machine, on my Mac.