Edgardo thanks for posting the links to Bell's Theorem. I read the first one and it was a clear description of Bell's experiment. I have a question (or an alternative explanation for the difference in probabilities between mathematical calculations and experimental results in the Bell's experiment) which I am posting in a new thread because: For some, I am sure, valid, but unknown, reason that thread has been lock. Bell's Theorem, for example in the link below: Spooky Action at a Distance – An Explanation of Bell’s Theorem by Gary Felder shows how the actual results (in this case 1/2) are lower than the mathematically derived probability (in this case 5/9). it is then concluded that this is only possible if the photons were quantum entangled. However is it not possible that the detectors are effecting the property/behavior/spin of the photons (at the time of detection or an infinitesimally small time prior to detection) in such a way as to change the probability from 5/9 to 1/2. for example: in the Dirac Three Polarizers Experiment it seems that the polarizer(s) might not just be simply filtering, but also modifying the spin of, the photon. or another example (and this is by no means a description of how photons spin is modified) to illustrate this conceptually: consider a vertical slot (i.e. perpendicular to surface of ground/earth) at which coins are flung by a precision machine at 45 degrees (to the ground/earth). now some of the coins might actually pass through the slot because of the dynamics of the forces between the circumference of the coin and the perimeter of the slot. in short: is it not possible that the detection equipment is biasing the probabilities?