Discussion moved to a new topic.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=166
Joy Christian wrote:![]()
A theoretical computer scientist, Paul Snively, has crystalized the essence of my work in a logical sequence that I find quite interesting.
According to Snively the logic behind my refutation of Bell's theorem is:
algebra with operations lacking the closure propertymathematical singularities
partial functions
logical inconsistency.
A brief discussion of what he means by this sequence can be found on his blog: http://psnively.github.io/blog/2015/01/22/Fallacy/.
Mikko wrote:Joy Christian wrote:![]()
A theoretical computer scientist, Paul Snively, has crystalized the essence of my work in a logical sequence that I find quite interesting.
According to Snively the logic behind my refutation of Bell's theorem is:
algebra with operations lacking the closure propertymathematical singularities
partial functions
logical inconsistency.
A brief discussion of what he means by this sequence can be found on his blog: http://psnively.github.io/blog/2015/01/22/Fallacy/.
That web page doesn't exist anymore.
Joy Christian wrote:An interesting comment left on by blog by some "Mr. Rosenblum": http://libertesphilosophica.info/blog/d ... mment-8247
ericreiter wrote:I like where Joy Christian is coming from, but there is an easier, more relevent, and actually running experiment that defies quantum mysticism.Why not use my well documented working experiments that demonstrate the failure of quantum mechanics in general. It is a beam-split coincidence test. I do it with gamma-rays to lay rest to the photon model, and I do it with alpha-rays to lay rest to the always applicable massive particle. See
http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/ ... -37-06.PDF
Also see my website http://www.unquantum.net
Also, ask me for my SPIE Proceedings paper of August 11, 2015. the abstract is linked from my website.
Thank you, Eric Reiter.
Joy Christian wrote:...I believe that we actually live in a quaternionic 3-sphere, S^3, and not in a flatland, R^3...
Q-reeus wrote:Joy Christian wrote:...I believe that we actually live in a quaternionic 3-sphere, S^3, and not in a flatland, R^3...
Err...shouldn't that be "I believe that we actually live in an octonic (or octonionic) 7-sphere, S^7, and not in a flatland, R^3"?
Joy Christian wrote:Well, yes, in general. But the current context is about my proposed experiment, which is restricted to testing only one of the S^3 fibers within the general S^7 bundle.
Q-reeus wrote:BTW Joy - has the experimental protocol now firmed to a specific scenario - e.g. will it still be using marked 'exploding' plastic shells and optical tracking? Performed in earth g or simulated zero-g (temporarily/periodically free-falling) environment? Closer to a firm timetable?
Joy Christian wrote:Q-reeus wrote:BTW Joy - has the experimental protocol now firmed to a specific scenario - e.g. will it still be using marked 'exploding' plastic shells and optical tracking? Performed in earth g or simulated zero-g (temporarily/periodically free-falling) environment? Closer to a firm timetable?
I don't yet know the answers to these questions, because there have been some setbacks of personal nature. Consequently, nothing firm about the timetable either.
Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations
Users browsing this forum: ahrefs [Bot] and 196 guests