#### SpectraCat

Science Advisor

- 1,395

- 1

None of that makes any difference, because by introducing new parameters, you change the system, and you must take those changes into account and re-derive the appropriate Bell inequalities. Anyway, why not just work within the idealized framework that Bell provided? Why are you introducing these new parameters?We may consider the function[integral]for the expectation value of spin:

[tex]{P}_{h}{(}{a}{,}{b}{)}{=}{\int}{\rho}{(}{\lambda}{)}{A}{(}{a}{,}{\lambda}{)}{B}{(}{b}{,}{\lambda}{)}{d}{\lambda}[/tex]

We may broaden the choice of the integral by including weights f(lambda,t) and g(lambda,t) for the spin values A and B. rho is normalized to unity as usual but we make,

Integral [rho*g*f]d lammda =n [which is not unity but some finite number suited to our testings]

[ By the above weights I have tried to take care of the time of measurement. Suppose for each instant we have the same distribution function rho for lambda[Or we may consider distribution functions].The weights are taking care of the cumulative effects of the distribution functions over the small interval of measurement.]