On a contextual model refuting Bell's theorem

Compare:3 observers travelling at different velocity relative to an object and each taking a measurement of the 'object's velocity'. That's 3 different outcomes; and potentially many more values could be obtained with more observers.. Although velocity is said to be a property of the object measured. it can be seen that belongs to the relation between the measured object and ('relative to this/ 'viewed this way') measuring apparatus. The beable object has the potential to be viewed many ways but does not have a store of measurement outcomes as its property. Measurement outcomes which are singular, fixed and limited should not be confused with absolute beable objects. The measurement is not what the object is/ about the object alone/ It is a product of the particular interaction with it, that has taken place.

Georgina,

how fast is the object going in which direction compared to what, and how fast does time go?

Hi John, yes I see what you mean. It is mainly about the solitary waves like the solitons considering the Einstein De broglie particle soliton model.

These entangled solitions can be studied with th EPR. If I can se retrun still at the philosophy general of this universe and how we must consider the particles. If we consider this GR and the points , so the locality cannot consider hidden variables. But in this reasoning the non locality becomes relevant. It is mainly if My memory is correct about the spin correlations for the quantum mechanics.

What I find interestig in this lambda of Eugen is that this refutes the bell s theorem about local hidden variables. It could be very relevant to analyse deeper this result for local hidden variables. It is mainly for me about the measurements and the limitations philosophical that we have. The main importance at my humble opinion if to consider the vacuums , not only the vacuum of this GR , but the two other spacetimes superimposed. The confusions seem about the points of these luminiferous spacetime. If there is an incompatibility with the QM and the local realism, there are reasons, that implies the necessity to insert deeper philosophical generalities than just this actual standard model and this GR. The problem is the scales and the limitations technological and in knowledges. Best

Dear Robert, my intuitive equation considers so this dark matter encoded in our nuclei, and for me the higgs mechanism is activated in this space vacuum coded due to photons creating these fields but the dark matter is activated giving the mass , that makes sense generally. The fact that the photons are lessmass and that this dark matter has a mass permits to explain the mass and also the antimatter and the quantum gravitation more the evolution furthermore. That is why I have this equation E=m(c^2+Xl^2)+ Y . The space vacuum so of the DE possesses the main codes and is a kind of coded energy , and the two others are fuels activating the mass, the fields electromagnetic and gravitational and distribute the matter when the 3 series merge. Now what I asked is like this dark matter is coupled also and that the fact that it is cold and imply the QG more the antimatter and with the higgs mechanism the mass, I search where it is the easiest way to find them in an experiment. The decays and couplings are not easy to measure.In fact if my reasoning is correct, the higgs decays must create the particles of DM even. The problem is the detection dear Robert, have you ideas ?

Steve,

This isn't so way off topic as it may seem, but did you see any announcement of work at Lawrence Livermore (and oh! what was that east coast university?) just today, that using laser projections through plasma has produced evidence of about 30 percent faster than light velocity photonic reactions? The blurb I saw as a short video feed on a newsie page said that it involves plasma refraction which changes the shape of the photonic response. Should be more coming but it does go to a lambda rather than frequency rationale.

And also, yes, I agree, it is only possible to present a Galilean Transform of relativity in a benchtop scenario experiment taking place within a single gravitational reference. Co-variance within that limited local frame is referenced to an observing scientist, not the generalized co-variance of global non local neutral centrality. I still argue that velocity changes the shape of the soloton, and reduces its density of energy in direct relation, so theoretically it should be possible to determine an approximation of an absolute velocity of either a soloton or material particle if the shape and energy density values could be experimentally observed. The speed of time being local to any discrete energy quantized soloton, and Lorentz invariant between such established absolute velocities. best jrc

Hi John , it is not possible to have velocities faster than light with photons. The constant c is essential for the universe , it is like a tool permitting to observe and implying also the electromagnetic fields and the heat like they are these photons particles massless , quanta of E. What is the shape of a solition and what they are really for you dear John ? Best

John, you asked 'how fast is the object going in which direction compared to what, and how fast does time go" The point is there is no singular answer to how fast the object is going. It depends upon how it is measured. A co-moving neasurer can consider it stationary. Direction also depends it could be given as left/ right/ towards/ away compared to measurer or another reference object or compass direction used. How fast does time go seems an odd question here. Fast refers to speed. Speed is distance over time. Time (the changing universal configuration of uni-temporal existence is not travelling a distance divided by the changing configuration. There isn't a singular speed or direction of the change. If by time you are referring to EMr signals that we use for vision and hence updating our seen present, they travel at the speed of light.

Steve,

the news blurp was a video from AmazeLab and was very sketchy, apparently it is the shape of the photon group interaction with the plasma that can either be slowed down or speeded up to ~+30%c. It said the findings were published in Physical Review Letters but my slo-mo 3G ISP and Bing search engine made it a no-go to find. But that is just the thing that is missing in both SR and GR. The observable and measurable constant speed of light doesn't mean that is the highest velocity it attains. If you start a zero velocity and go up to some velocity then back down to zero, it will take more time than if it were going light velocity constantly for the lengtyh of time it dwelled at peak velocity. So the argument is suggested that light velocity is some root mean that relativistically operates physically as a universal constant and finite rate of repsonsiveness. But we have now gone off topic. The plasma experiments indicate a wavelength operator, mathematically speaking, rather than the standard QM frequency arguments. best jrc

In fact John, you consider so that the vectors, tensors, scalars of the general relativity alone permits to create the topologies, geometries, fields. So you consider a little bit points for these solitons and they change their shapes in function of velocities and so changes its energy also. But if you consider a different logic for the space time luminiferous and that the points or strings are not the real answer and that the topologies, geometries are not created with different oscillations, vibrations of this GR connected at this planck scale in 1D, so the velocities, changes, densities of energies are not from this GR alone . Now if you consider a deeper logic superimposed instead of these photons alone and this GR, so you have a space vacuum wich can be coded and also this dark matter cold wich is essential, but they don t interact with these photons, they interact with the ordinary matter but we cannot analyse these interactions still. The hidden variables exist but the photons are not for me the good parameter to see better this. Because the photons are not encoded in nuclei and so are not bosonic fields still , the best is to create different extperiments to see these hidden variables at my opinion.

Oops I wrote in the same time, we must respect indeed the Blog of Eugen, thanks for developing this plasma results. Regards

The correlations or anticorrelations found stem from the relation of the absolute particles to each other when the pair is formed. Which is maintained unless the particles are disturbed differently. Their relation to each other is not to do with how one of them is measured. Same measurement tangles for both reveals the particles relation to each other it does not produce it.

-measurement angles-

Preempting the question-'so why is the speed of light ( in a vacuum) constant? It is a periodic actualization. Period is invariant undergoing translation.

Hi Eugen, thanks for your reply. I see lambda is meant to represent some sort of shared connection at pair production carried over to same measurement scenarios. Lambda of the pair is lambda of each separated particle prior to measurement. For lambda to be of singular value, it must be for one particle relative to the other. So is just representing correlation or anticorrelation of the pair *from production) I agree that is common cause of correlation (or anti-)) that may be found upon local measurement.

Steve,

you point out "the photons are not encoded in nuclei".

So far. There is yet to be a rationale for the peculiarities of intensity rates of chage in the Transition Zone. The right question should be; 'What do those measurable variations tell us of what determines wavelength?' (lambda)

Now again, in the span of one wavelength, light velocity would take a finite span of time. But the wave doesn't know how fast time goes, it can only be somewhere between nil and light velocity... OR all of the above. so mathematically the physicality can be simplified to the wave seeking what that speed of time is... so going from nil to c and back again at an exponential rate of change would require that c (light velocity) is the root exponential mean of the sum of integral partial differentials for the span of real time relative to the gravitational reference frame and by Lorentz any (luminous aetherial) reference frame the wave subsequently transits through.

So we can postulate that the maximun speed (scalar value) reached in the waveformation is equivalent to [(c^1/e) c } = 2.143^14 cm/sec . And that transcends (e is after all a transcendental number) the locality of the waveform of any single wavelenghth and makes the wavetrain rigidly connected across the real time length of span of emission. The time span at c in each wavelength reaches out across that real proportional extension of length. jrc

And now the movie, folks!

If we were to accept that postulate presented above for the rigid connectivity of a wavetrain of an emission of a series of repetetive wavelengths of the same frequency, then not only would the exponential sum value of spacetime extension of each wavelength reach out forward in the LOS of transmission,, it would reciprocally reach out rearward towards the source of emission and a rationale for the perceived non-locality of Bell-Aspect experimental apparatus results can be explained. The time-wise connectivity is as rigid as if were itself material, after all it is an extension of the Transition Zone of the material particle emitter. Thanks for the audience, "Its a Trick Bulb" jrc

John, I am sorry but yes they are encoded in a kind of coded space vacuum and permit the heat, the electromagnetic forces, the fact to observe. The nuclear forces are stronger just because we have more photons than the electromagnetic force. It seems logic.

The ordinary matter appears simply because this space vacuum coded encodes photons and this cold dark matter to create the reality.The time is not odd it is just irreversible and correlated with the motions and changes, because without motions, there is no time. The wavelenghts are not odd, they are just correlated with the ocialltions motions of particles in a superfluidity and like all evolves and that we have changes, so we can utilise like a tool these waves. The photons are not the primoridal essence of the universe, and they shall not answer to our deep unknowns. The constant c in a vacuum also is not odd, it is just a tool for the universe,and about the luminiferous ether, it is just a part of the puzzle, we need to consider this DM and this DE, the problem is always the philosophy it seems to me, the thinkers are too much persuaded to better understand the universe and that this GR is the only one piece of puzzle, like if we had only these photons and that their oscillations explain all, it is odd for me.The people now want to make metaphysics with non mecessary extradiemnsions, reversibilities of this time, and others. It is due to abstracts maths creating confusions. Since when the GR and the photons alone have been proved to be the only truth ? they speak to god or what the thinkers or maybe they beleive that their philosophy and knowledges are more developped, I don t know but it is odd, even einstein told what I tell. We must retrun at this old school instead to create all these confusions for me. It is not a competition where we want to be the specialist of this GR in detailing it to reach the unknowns, no the aim is to explain the unknowns and since that the thinkers are in this GR prison and strings they turn in round. The fields here, the waves there, the geometrical algebras here, the non commutativity here, extradiemnsions there ??? is it a hidden camera lol ? the universe is simple generally and the photons are just the photons, they are not the primoridal essence. They are just a fuel.

Let s be frank and tell me more . I am going to ask simple question and answer simply , don t evitate the answer.

1 What is for you the origin philosophical of the universe ? do you consider a ind of god or other , and if yes why ? do you consider fields or particles and why ? do you consider this BB?

2 Do you consider that we have only this GR and the photons like primoridal essence and if yes why , what are the rpoofs ?

3 what is for you the origin of topologies, geometries and what are the foundamental objects? you can utilise the strings or points, the geom alg or the geometrodynamics and if yes why and have you proofs ?

4 What is for you the dark matter and the dark energy and why and have you proofs ? Best , friendly

Gee Steve,

each one of those questions would require for a dissertation.

In context with Bell Inequalities, I think it is best to constrain the theoretical discussions to more modest aims than some Grand Unified Field Theory. If such an all encompassing theory can be had, then it should support limited applications to specific instances such as Bell-ASpect and Stern-Gerlach results. The maths employed to analyze the probabilities must then stand on their own, wouldn't you think? I personally find a lambda approach satisfying because it is amenable to a condensed matter state and by extension a condensed energy state wherein two scalars, distance and speed, can be examined. In the Std Model frequency (nu, in the case of e=h(nu) then goes commonly to a vector value of velocity which makes the relativistic side more restrictive in terms of degrees of freedom. jrc