Sambuco's latest activity

In order not to distract the discussion too much, I would like to focus on this statement because I think it is the core of the...

This is true. I put that in bold to make sure it's clear. I agree with this statement. However, I do not agree with this. Here's why...

If @DrChinese will confirm that he agrees with this, as a matter of algebra, that would be helpful, because from his posts so far I do...

Thanks for saying this. Yes, I get a bit caught up in these discussions. I really don't mind the back and forth, somehow I always gain...

As I said before, my previous #198 is not a suggestion that Ma's eq. (1) and (2) are the same, but rather a mathematical proof...

@DrChinese is unfortunately caught in a closed loop where he will deny this QM math based on his misreading of Ma's paper, and his...

I have provided you with a mathematical proof that Ma's eq. (1) and (2) are the same. If you don't understand we can help you, but stop...

So you're saying Ma's physics is right and he just misspoke? When he said "This can be seen by rewriting Eq. (1) in the basis of Bell...

They are the same state! First, some basic definitions from Ma's paper: ##\ket{\psi^\pm}_{ij} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\ket{H}_i \ket{V}_j...

I think it illustrates that there is not a general consensus among physicists about how to interpret these experiments. I don't have any...

Yes, this is a fair point, and you give good context on Peres's viewpoint.

So far I haven't written any paper about entanglement swapping or anything like that, but after this discussion maybe I will. (In this...

As a minor comment, the fragment you quote certainly seems to suggest an interpretation like Ballentine's, but I'm not entirely sure...

As the conversation has continued I'll post here. In Ma's actual experiment, the BiSA apparatus is interpreted as performing a...

I know, but I'm bringing it up again because we're having the same kind of discussion now, and I think the article is relevant because...