- #1
morrobay
Gold Member
- 1,022
- 1,244
With E a,b = ( dλ ( a,a' b,b' λ) Suppose λ depends independently/locally on detector setting choices at A and B.
For example suppose there are 360 detector settings at A and 360 at B , corresponding to 360 particle/detector interactions/outcomes at A = ± 1 and also at B = ± 1. Then as θ = β-α there are 3602 possible thetas.
If these thetas when applied to: P++ = P-- = 1/2 (sin θ/2)2 and to P-+ = P+- = 1/2/(cos θ/2)2
are in agreement with QM predictions: Bell inequality violations
( that of course include the 360 cases when α = β , sin 0 = 0 , cos 0 = 1)
Then could a computer simulation for the 3602 θ's verify if this local,deterministic hidden variable model fits the facts ?
For example suppose there are 360 detector settings at A and 360 at B , corresponding to 360 particle/detector interactions/outcomes at A = ± 1 and also at B = ± 1. Then as θ = β-α there are 3602 possible thetas.
If these thetas when applied to: P++ = P-- = 1/2 (sin θ/2)2 and to P-+ = P+- = 1/2/(cos θ/2)2
are in agreement with QM predictions: Bell inequality violations
( that of course include the 360 cases when α = β , sin 0 = 0 , cos 0 = 1)
Then could a computer simulation for the 3602 θ's verify if this local,deterministic hidden variable model fits the facts ?