Yes, "Se on tammea" means that it is made of oak. I wondered because all your other Finnish sentences were correct. My main point though was related to the usage of the words "mikä" and "mitä".
Not completely.
In your context, yes.
Was that a typo? "Tämä on tammi" could be answer to "Mikä tämä on?"
One can also say "Se on kahvia mikä maistuu hyvältä" ( "It's coffee which tastes good" ).
One would not say "Se on kahvia mitä maistuu hyvältä".
Right.
No, IMHO the perfect correlation in the Bell experiment is a kind of superdeterminism. One can always try to explain the weird correlation away, for example through FTL influence (without free will).
From the Feynman Lectures here: "As we apply quantum mechanics to larger and larger things, the laws about the behavior of many atoms together do not reproduce themselves, but produce new laws, which are Newton’s laws, which then continue to reproduce themselves from, say, micro-microgram size...
How does that relate to saying that there is a nearly infinite number of laws that change when the scale (or size/complexity) changes until Newton's laws ?
I hesitate to contribute to an advanced thread but their definition of "realism" in the context of what Bell proved does not seem to be right. This is what they say: "A theory obeys realism if measurement outcomes can be interpreted as revealing a property of the system that exists independent...
No, I can start with nothing, add 3 x times until I arrive at 15. Then I just have to remember how many times I added 3. This is very fundamental starting from definitions.
x = 15/3 follows from the definition of division.
Of course you can just divide both sides by 3.