Recent content by QuantunEnigma

Is this Bell's theorem refuted? Expert comment please? From abstract quant-ph/0703179 Disproof of Bell’s Theorem by Clifford Algebra Valued Local Variables Joy Christian, Perimeter Institute, 31 Caroline Street North, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 2Y5, Canada, and Department of Physics...

Please. The attached files, are they accessible by clicking, or by how?

QUOTE OF ZZ ACTION The secret site is the one that you and i are monitoring, that is all. The one that cannot be mentioned like this [SPAM link removed - the NEXT time I have to do this, you're gone! - Zz.] because I do not know how to make it a hidden legal link to show what we are talking...

I thank all of the group for their contributions. They are the gurus that i meant and not MW or the way you are drChinese mouthpiece sometimes. You do not hide behind MW so he is not the guru I was talking about. And I see our correspondence is ruining the flow so I am closing down on this...

Gordon says he is committed to returning as soon as he has "revised one large page with appendages. He says the new site was converted from the old one on 12 August. Factoring etc was up on the old site for years which contained more than 2Mb." You are so emotional obsessed about "Gordon" why...

I think this cannot be correct. Please which experiments support negative probabilities?

You were not baited and a "mutual friend" ? liked your response also he said. We had discussion re naive realism and the problem that anyone would believe it. But your answer is not naive realism as we understand it and so it is a good and helpfull answer to build on.

As long as one person knows the secret web address then I have done an accidental good job. I did not know it was illegal to give it out when I did. The address had many pages long before i communicated here but do not let facts kerb your enthusiasms. Was it Albert Einstein said...

Please explain ''Local Reality'' and ''theoretical predictions of Local Reality''. Thank you.

Please explain Forum Rules Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click...

In my frame of reference the start of this thread by wm was about a possible good apple theory and a possible not good apple theory. I do not see any reference to more tests. I see the opposite. I concerned that more tests is not the case considered but more theory.

:rolleyes: I appreciate this thread hanging to dear life and will give my personal opinion in my frame of reference. You know the EPR's papers did not challenge QM predictions so no real feathers were ruffled during the debate. wm at [personal theory weblink edited out] do not challenge QM...