. The entanglement case and the fully deterministic case produce identical results (yes): The entanglement dictates 100% correlation at equal detector angles (a-b=0) as a result of the cos2 Malus law. In multi photon GHZ type experiments, with 3, 4 or more entangled photons, this means that if you know the outcome of one measurement then you know them all. And that's of course the same for the fully deterministic case. There is a difference though. To be more exact: In an N photon experiment with equal detector settings there are: - N random local processes in case of the Bell Inequality calculations. - 1 random global process in case of N entangled photons. - 0 random processes in the fully deterministic case. The EPR tests do support both the entangled case and the fully deterministic case. The fully deterministic case is proved if the A photon is detected before the B photon is even emitted. If the correlation is still 100% then this means that the results of the B measurement is fully deterministic over the entire path from PDC to detector. All EPR experiments with PDC's test on the fully deterministic case when viewed from the appropriate SR reference frame. The B photon is emitted a long time (~5 ns) after the A photon in the PDC. This means that there are always reference frames in which the A photon is detected before the B photon is even emitted. Special Relativity states that the laws of physics should be the same in all reference frames. It should not be that hard to device an experiment were the A photon is detected before the emission of the B photon in all reference frames. If B is emitted after any "collapse of the wave function" "projection" "application of born's rule" or however you want to call it then this would prove that the underlying physics of Quantum Mechanics could be fully deterministic, at least for the spin type measurements. The "hidden variables" would predetermine the outcome of the measurement in the fully deterministic case. The stochastic nature of QM would be due to a random spread in the HV's but not to an a priory non-determinism of QM. No non-locality or FTL action on a distance would be needed. If the laws of physics are the same in all reference frames then the current EPR experiments already support such a full determinism for spin related experiments. That is, if there aren't any of these loopholes anymore :^) Regards, Hans.