Classical Spheres, Division Algebras, and the Illusion of Quantum Non-locality:

Thomas Ray

"You better stay away of Casinos... "

I do.

That is independent of the issue, however. Casino games are based on probabilities derived from a space of perfect information. Conventional quantum theory is derived from a space of no information.

Richard Gill

Interesting, Tom. You think that the challenge is pointless. JJC wrote out the rules of the challenge together with me. JJC seems to think it is rather meaningful.

JJC has moreover now been working hard for maybe a week at an attempt to win the challenge, making use of his theory. The challenge is designed to test his theory because if his theory is entirely correct, the challenge is winnable.

Yet you think the challenge is pointless. I do see a point to it, however. I'll tell you the point to the challenge if you give me the right answer to the following question: do you think the challenge is winnable?

I recommend you find out what it is, before you answer that question. A yes/no answer is enough.

Richard Gill

The Bell model, and the Pearle model, have got absolutely nothing to do with quantum mechanics. They are classical physical models which happen to reproduce some of quantum mechanics predictions.

Richard Gill

JJC has entered a casino. A casino running a Dutch book.

Richard Gill

Peter, you said "The objective I focus on is simply to reproduce all 'quantum correlations' and effects grouped under 'entanglement' with an entirely classical mechanism". Well, you have failed. You have not reproduced the predictions of a loophole-free Bell-CHSH type experiment, and you never ever will. That is why I am not going to read your essay. Discussion closed.

If you want to get my attention, you will have to win the quantum Randi challenge.

Thomas Ray

Yeah, I referenced a similar scam in my essay this year.

Thomas Ray

You're saying Bell's and Pearle's frameworks aren't physical, then? I agree.

Joy Christian

Dear All,

Just to let you know:

I have formally submitted two data files of angular momentum vectors to Richard Gill, which I believe meet his 10,000 Euros Challenge.

Wish me luck,

Joy

Florin Moldoveanu

No hard feelings, good luck to you.

Jonathan Dickau

You have my best wishes also..

I have always had faith that some worthwhile Physics would come out of this debate, but for now Joy, may you have...

Good Luck!

Jonathan

Richard Gill

Thanks for the attempted submission, Joy. You notified me by email that it is in the form of an R script which creates two files.

The R script in question, http://rpubs.com/jjc/16531, indeed creates two sets of directions of angular momentum. They are called e_0 and e_90. According to the comments, both are "Alice's directions", and in both cases, Bob's directions are the opposite directions to Alice's. However, the challenge requires submission of one set of directions for Alice and one set of directions for Bob. So in its present state this does not (yet) constitute a legal submission - I cannot call in adjudicators a this stage, let alone process the files myself.

This submission is therefore disqualifed. A new submission is always welcome, however: a particular competitor is only disqualified from more than one formal adjudication process.

Richard Gill

PS it is not for me to suggest how to fix JJC's program, but maybe he means that the two sets of Alice's directions e_0 and e_90 in http://rpubs.com/jjc/16531 should be glued together to form one big set? If so we are ready for the next step

Richard Gill

Judy, I don't like the tone of your comments.

In my opinion, your logic is badly wrong (Peter's too).

Anyway, posterity will decide.

Thomas Ray

"Interesting, Tom. You think that the challenge is pointless."

My reference was to the "QRC." I find it unfortunate that you have bought into this anti-rationalist scheme.

Richard Gill

A framework (Bell, Pearle, QM, Christian) is a mathematical structure. Abstract.

One can attempt to map it to the real world - in other words, map it to a physical structure. Concrete.

One could identify different physical structures. A particular mathematical framework could map nicely to one of those physical structures, but not to the other.

You can't say that one structure is physical, another isn't. One might be useful, another not. One might be appropriate in one situation, another in another.

Richard Gill

The QRC, as other Randi challenges, is an exceptionally rational technique for debunking crackpots.

Thomas Ray

"... do you think the (Joy Christian) challenge is winnable?"

Yes.

Richard, it is wrong to conflate the pointless programming challenge of "QRC" with the challenge to match a quantum measurement simulation with physical theory.

Richard Gill

Unfortunately, people get addicted to playing the one-armed bandit in my Dutch book casino. I should charge an entrance fee ("club membership").

Thomas Ray

"The QRC, as other Randi challenges, is an exceptionally rational technique for debunking crackpots."

The "QRC" is a crackpot scheme. What is that -- like fighting fire with fire?

Richard Gill

Tom said yes to the question "... do you think the (Joy Christian) challenge is winnable?"

The Joy Christian challenge (the one Joy Christian helped to fomulate and now is trying to win) is a pointless programming challenge of "QRC" type. Pointless, not only because it is merely a silly programming task, but also because it cannot be won - it is an impossible programming task. Of the kind "find four positive integers a, b, c, and p, with p > 2 and a^p b^p = c^p".

« Previous Page Next Page »