Dear Gary,
Addressing your key comments (some seeming typos fixed):
1. Essay (AB|CQ) = 1 was profoundly sublime. I had to read it several times of course. I'm still digesting it. The formalisms are challenging but comprehensible.
Please see #4 below as added motivation to check the physics in detail. Please ask questions as the need arises (privately if you wish); no matter how simple or daft.
2. If I had named the essay, I would have titled it "Bell's Inequality, revision 2.0 - The Missing Pieces".
I could have done with that improvement at essay-closing time! But the version here is a Draft and v2. has this new working title: "Nature's mathematics settles the physics in Bell-v-Einstein." I look forward to the day when we have: GA settles the physics in Bell-v-Einstein.
Reason: Reading many of the essays here, I see the need for terms like GA or Nature's mathematics in many places. We need, in my view, the ultimate mathematics for realists: having no irrelevant abstractions and all relevant laws satisfied continuously. See #4 again; noting, of course, that our work with relevant abstractions is just fine for man-made gadgets from submarines, through LHCs and skyscrapers, to rockets.
3. I assume that you have read Dr. Klingman's essay. If not, you should - no, you MUST. You and he are on exactly the same page.
Yes, thank you; many times. Alas, at the moment, I suspect we are not in the same library. But I hope that will change; hopefully helped along by work such as yours. Note that Ed's model could not address the simple test proposed by Cristi Stoica (a leading essayist here); nor Aspect's results; and how is Ed's 'realism' defined; etc.
4. Geometric Algebra is peeking its head out regarding the beables and their local values.
I am so glad that you see that! Please be the first to help that shy, beautiful (and sometimes tricky) GA out of the closet and work with her in the unified "BT" context proposed in my essay. For I'd love to see elementary GA taught in primary schools: with GA on its way to becoming Nature's local realistic Mathematics.
5. Re GA.
How is your work received within the GA community? Have you any rejections from journals? If so, what do they say? (Write to me privately if you wish.) Are you familiar with Elio Conte's efforts? For example: Conte, E. (2001). Biquaternion Quantum Mechanics. Bologna, Pitagora Editrice? (Alas, he supports nonlocality!) How about this Caves, Fuchs, Schack essay [arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0104088v1.pdf] and the view that amplitudes should be complex numbers rather than reals or quaternions?
With best regards, and looking forward to spending time with your ideas; Gordon