On a contextual model refuting Bell's theorem

Thanks Georgi.

John,

Change of the configuration of existence is continual. As a particle moves through space it too is a part of the changing configuration. Each configuration is a time. Change of the configuration has no singular spatial direction. And there is no singular rate of change. Some parts of the configuration of existence are changing spatially more than others. A particular change occurs within the entirety of existence. The movement of clock hands are also part of the change of the configuration of existence. Comparison of a change being investigated can be made with change of clock reading. Timing can still happen.

"As a particle moves through space....?!"

I thought you disavowed a physical necessity for space. That's the same post hoc ergo propter hoc that Isaac Newton explained away by saying 'See the math works".

John,

I should have been more careful with my language. Saying instead 'as the particle moves through the configuration of existence'. By 'space' I'm not referring to something with independent existence but the volume of existence,

Georgina,

By volume of existence I am assuming you mean that it is an absolute void with particles and electromagnetic radiation from those particles moving and perhaps colliding with each other. There is no physical connection between any discrete mass or emission other than the subsequent coincidence of ballistic collision or absorption and/or refraction of EMr. And all that we are capable of observing is only a small portion of what is actually actively in existence and observable due to clever contrivances of reception devices or the same responsiveness inherent to human sensory organs. That is your contention (paradigm) of what the existential reality is; am I concisely correct so far? And that there need be no other agency for a particle to be an observable distance from another if there are sufficient EMr emissions recieved, and that time is simply that which we experience as an assemblage of sensory perception and mental processes. Am I correct in that? best jrc

No absolute void. Fields have be disturbances / changes of distribution of something. I propose a base existence which allows electric, magnetic and gravitational fields to be and EM radiation. We can't see with sense organs or via devices, what exists at Unitemporal-Now. We are only able to experience the products formed. Not the Source objects from which that potential data has emanated.

Object reality is existence. to which We do not have sensory access. Image reality is the products of sensory signal receipts and processing. Compare : the beable particle is an existing thing, Object reality, Absolute as no relative perspective has been applied. The measurement is like Image reality in that it is not the source beable reality but is a limited relative, contextual; product of a process/method.

John re. your "time is simply that which we experience as an assemblage of sensory perception and mental processes. Am I correct in that?"

there are different kinds of time.

A configuration of existence is a time. Chane of that configuration is Foundational passage of time. We experience the updating of sensory products, which is Emergent passage of time; The changing subjective present.

There is also clock time which is from the counting of standard events generated by the device or in the case of sundials from the regular motion of Earth and Sol.

Thanks Georgina,

for the clarification. One other thing; do you see the several characteristics of fields as being distinct by virtue of some physical variation of the same thing (whatever that "stuff" might be), or do you think of them as being physically distinct and somehow associated with particles and EMr? jrc

Hi John,

" Employing Ockham's razor, it is better to assume there is only one kind of base existence from which all other differentiated kinds of existence are formed rather than multiple kinds of base. Supported by the apparent

conversion of particles into other kinds of particle during certain kinds of interactions. Which would not be possible if they were ultimately constituted from different foundational types of existence.' G Woodward

from Universe soup and Sandcastles. FQXi What is Fundamental essay competition, 2017

I.e. All fields, EMr and all particles being different kinds of spatial and temporal distributions of (and within) base existence.

P.S. By temporal distribution I mean being within a sequence of configurations of existence.

Muchowsky has inserted a determinate hidden variable into the middle of a causal set of a very complex quantum process and claimed a quantum coup. The hidden variable acts just like an uncertain quantum variable for that one step and so the hidden variable determines the polarization outcome. Muchowsky then claims that this hidden variable shows determinism and not quantum uncertainty.

The quantum outcome of a single photon polarization is the simplest example of Bell's theorem. Classically, a photon always has a certain knowable polarization and a measurement simply reveals the polarization that the single photon always had before the measurement.

In contrast, a quantum single photon can exist in a superposition of polarizations without a knowable single polarization. A measurement reveals one of two polarizations statistically, but does not reveal any knowable precursor polarization for the single photon.

Muchowsky describes a process where a highly polarized quantum laser single photon results in two downshifted quantum photons by a quantum BBO crystal made up of quantum bonds and quantum atoms. Now after all these inherently quantum processes, Muchowsky inserted a hidden parameter and concluded that there is no quantum fairy and so the universe is really determinate and not quantum after all.

Methinks thou doth protest too much...

The BBO quantum photons have polarizations either perpendicular or parallel to the laser single photon. Thus, Bell's theorem does not apply since there is no role for quantum phase coherence in this comparison of entangled photons. In fact, there are many versions of hidden variables that also do not violate Bell's theorem, including McEachern's finely tuned Shannon noise of missed detections...Attachment #1: hiddenVariableInQuantum.JPG

Doc Agnew,

And still no one can say what a photon even looks like. We are stuck with a spread of probabilities that we can only loosely associate with the mutually perpendicular orthogonality of electromagnetic response, and the axial pseudovector that results in a flip decision when two EM fields are in near enough proximity to interact. Call it what we may, we need a new plan, Sam. best jrc

John, what is a photon indeed ??? a point, a string or a serie of 3D spheres like in my model and what are their changes , it is due to what ? is it due to external fields of this GR or .....

Onward! through the fog!

aha lol , and the fog is thick , we cannot see our steps .... onward told us the source that said

Hi John, I think you are alluding to its unsee-able form. What it looks like, the phenomenon is a very tiny flash of light, when seen in a completely dark environment. The product formed subsequent to stimulation of a photoreceptor.

Just as the seen light is not the photon particle alone, the probabilities are not the property of the photon alone but relations with it, whereby something to do with it can be known.

Yep, that's the ticket. So what new ideas for experimentation can be proposed to perhaps discover what sort of form a 'photon' might exhibit? Such as "why is the perforated screen on the interior of the glass door of my microwave effective in preventing irradiation of objects outside the oven? Why that size of holes? jrc

John,

Visible 'light' has a very, very much smaller wavelength than microwaves. So cooking inside can be seen because of the visible 'light' wavelengths passing through. The microwave wavelength is about 12cm. I have read that waves van pass easily through an aperture of diameter 1/4 their wavelength. It gets less likely transmission will occur the smaller than 1/4 wavelength the hole's diameter. At about 1/120 of the microwave wavelength the perforated screen is, I presume, as impenetrable to the microwaves as a solid barrier. A photon is an amount of energy. A change of existence happening over time. Only whole photons are detectable, As only they can cause change to an atom/ shift the energy level of an electron. I.e. that amount of energy is the minimum for a change that can be detected.