On a contextual model refuting Bell's theorem

John, that's what the paper, and Robert advocate. However, don't you think ,as you mentioned measurements being different from actual particles, that it is the measurement process responsible. If the method/ protocol/ apparatus only allows certain fixed outcomes, the measurements are forced to comply. "Cutting to size going on." So pre-measurement the particles have a relation that would fit the inequalities if they could be measured without alteration of their relationship. But having to fit what method/ protocol/ apparatus allows, the relationship between many particles is altered away from fitting the inequalities, as seen in the measurement results. The relation of measurements is not the same as the relation of unmeasured particles. So Bell's inequalities do not apply to the outcomes. Violation of the inequalities is to be expected.

Hi Georgina,

You ask: "What is parameter lambda? Not just wavelength? Is it a Part of standard entanglement theory? How does sharing this parameter value give the correlated outcomes?"

lambda is a hidden variable and insofar a physical property of a particle. More is not needed for the purpose of the model but can be subject for further research.

How sharing this parameter value gives the correlated outcomes is described in the paper.

Eugen, what is the real meaning of lambda , what is its origin and what it creates like property ? it comes from what and it implies what exactly? this hidden variable seems interesting . It is mainly its origin the most important.

Because what ask Georgine is important. It is there that thishidden variable must have a cause and an origin. We have several possibilities . If we take the GR only and the photons , so we can extrapolate with the strings and so we can consider the fields permitting the hidden variables, the geometrical algebras can help. Now if we consider an other logic like in my model, we have the codes of this space vacuum also . There are also other possibilities. It comes from what for your ?

You are going to better understand me, it is important what you have found because it gives many roads of researchs about this hidden variable lambda. All is a question of philosophy. If we take the fact that these photons are dedictaed to be encoded and are not really an information, so they are just photons, but in the stheory of strings it is different than in my model because at their planck scale in 1D they are connected with a 1D cosmic field of this GR and there there are informations for these photons permitting to change their properties. But in my reasoning they are a fuel and are encoded in something that we don t know still and so there are like fields or others in this space vacuum of matters, and like you uilise matters for the experiments so they can be under these hidden variables, like if they wanted to be encoded due to something. If they are under these fields or others of the GR or this space vacuum, so indeed they change their properties . The values of this parameter lambda in logic must change in repeating the experiements even.

Hi again, Georgi,

Yes, kind of. But it gets wordy fast, eh.

We do have to make the real distinction between Bell-Aspect experiments (photons) and Stern-Gerlach type experiments (particles), and accept that so far no one can agree on what physically constitutes a rationale defining a material particle. So the only thing that the two types of experimental apparatus have in common is the confusing flip of polar orientation once the clusters of either particles or photons interact with the electromagnetic domain range of the elements of the apparatus. Your familiarity with topology gives you a recognition that it is very much like in physical reality, that electromagnetic interaction evolves what mathematically would be describable as a pseudovector at the interaction threshold. So I guess, yes to your above observations.

My questions seem to always go to what can we glean from various physical experiments that would suggest what the realistic material form might be for a particle and what volumetric form might be for a photon. best jrc

Hi ,

John, it is sure that we must differenciate the particles and waves even with this wave particle duality. If the photon is takend as a particle in fields related to the interaction of material with light that is absorbed and emitted and can be taken also as a wave in regions relating to light propagation. That s why what you tell is important about the interactions with the matters of the apparatus. Furthermore we can go deeper in considering that the photons are just a fuel for the universe and that this space vacuum can imply changes also . These hidden variables in fact if we take the generality of interactions are so complex and never the same.

Steve,

That is the direction I go. But do you see what I mean by the EM domain range(s) interaction evolving a pseudovector? If we have a union of right hand rule sets, then the interacting fields share a common axial radii so that should mean that the polar orientation is deterministic. But that would only be in Blackboard R3 which lacks a time dimension. In real time S3 even if we have an intersection of right hand rule axial radii and thus a commonality, the non-zero torque on each of the separate fields is found to be counter-rotating to each other's field. Hence; local but non-deterministic. Given enough insight, we might be able to define a particulate moment or volumetric solotonic wave that would be predictable given known contours of electromagnetic configuration at the threshold and time-wise through the transit of fields interaction. best jrc

Georgina,

I wish this topic had an edit tag, but back to your point... I agree that in actual experimental process we inevitably pre-arrange the orientations of the projected particles or photons. I have long said the bartender's answer to the Bell-Aspect experiments is that "It's a trick bulb". best jrc

John, reading Bell's theorem, Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy; I didn't realize how 'entangled' the theory is with space-time But if we instead have uni-temporal 'becoming, the second same outcome only comes to be if and when selected. It isn't already existing in space-time. Arguing against outcome determinism, (Realism.) The absolute beables without relative perspective and measurement context applied have the potential to give a variety of outcomes, which depending on what measuring is made. Not a collection of outcome states or values but undefined potential. Correlation found due to common cause at origin affecting same measurements not measurement of 1 causally affecting 2 I think that common causes is called lambda.

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.