Login Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables?
Gill1109 wrote: They believed that they had built a genuine local hidden variables model which violated Bell inequalities.

No doubt you're right, having so much experience with these things, but I wound up deciding they couldn't possibly think that. So, they were thinking of the "coincidence" loophole, and doing their best to hide it (perhaps only subconsciously). That "insight" (according to you, wrong) was, I thought, possibly a new contribution to the topic.

Gill1109 wrote: It was very difficult to track down the mistake in the mathematics, it was hidden very deeply and came down to forgetting an index (one of many) and forgetting to renormalise a measure to get a probability distribution, in the heart of their construction.

Yes I read your paper, that's what tipped me off to it, although I had noticed it a bit already. I just couldn't believe they could make such a mistake, and decided it was (more or less) deliberate. But again, I'll accept your judgment; compared to you I only glanced at the paper. Also I don't know the people involved as well.

Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell's theorem - for or against Hidden Variables? - by secur - 08-01-2016, 10:19 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)