Need help with some aspects of Bell’s theorem

[Nugatory]

Per local HV theory the the predicted by QM correlation may be derived from HV that measures orientation of the corresponding detector and change photon's polarization accordingly (using function similar to Malus' law). In this case there is no need for photon pair to influences each other over the distance to achieve sufficient correlation. Instead they need just "pay attention" to the orientation of local detector only.

I don't understand what you're saying here.
Are you saying that the QM correlation can be derived from a hidden variable theory in which the result at one detector does not depend on the angle and result at the other detector? If so, you might want to try coding up a computer simulation - I expect that you'll find that it doesn't work.

 

[miosim]

I don't understand what you're saying here.
Are you saying that the QM correlation can be derived from a hidden variable theory in which the result at one detector does not depend on the angle and result at the other detector? If so, you might want to try coding up a computer simulation - I expect that you'll find that it doesn't work.

I guess I need to try this, but it would take time for me to do this.
Meanwhile, I have a question.

If the main goal of the Bell theorem is to prove non-locality of QM why does this prove relies on rejecting of local HV theory? The non-locality is a well known feature of QM. So if QM predicts correlation and this prediction is based on non-locality of wave function and the experiment conforms QM prediction - what else do we need? Why do we need to complicate this by mixing with disproving of local HV.
Is proving of non-locality indeed depends of disproving local HV theory? What if we wouldn't have the EPR paper?

 

[Avodyne]

The goal of the Bell theorem is to show that local hidden variable theories cannot mimic QM.

Before Bell, it was not clear that the nonlocality in the wave function could not be mimicked by LHV.

Whether or not you think this is interesting is up to you.

 

[miosim]

The goal of the Bell theorem is to show that local hidden variable theories cannot mimic QM.

Before Bell, it was not clear that the nonlocality in the wave function could not be mimicked by LHV.

Whether or not you think this is interesting is up to you.

Aha...
I am getting closer in understanding your response while trying to mimic the correlation predicted by QM cos (a-b), as suggested by Nugatory. I am looking for the equivalent formula in which A and B are separated (meaning that particles A and B know orientation of the correspondent detector only, but not both). Doesn't look it is possible based on the trigonometry.

cos(A - B) = cos A cos B + sin A sin B

I need more time to think about this.

Thank you for response.