The Mistake in the CHSH Inequality

[Fred Diether]

It is pretty easy to see the mistake in CHSH.

Equation (18) is a good example showing that you can do things with math that are physically impossible.  B1 + B2 and B1 - B2 are physically impossible.  And that is why my classical prediction simulations of -a.b can violate CHSH.  Bell was really really wrong.  It is about time you dinosaurs realize that.

[Richard Gill]

But Fred, under local realism, B1 + B2 and B1 - B2 do both exist. In your computer simulation, Fred, they exist too. B1 and B2 are mathematical functions of variables which do exist: the hidden variables, and the measurement settings.

Sent from my iPad

On 5 Nov 2025, at 17:07, Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com> wrote:

It is pretty easy to see the mistake in CHSH.

<CHSHderivation2.jpg>

Equation (18) is a good example showing that you can do things with math that are physically impossible.  B1 + B2 and B1 - B2 are physically impossible.  And that is why my classical prediction simulations of -a.b can violate CHSH.  Bell was really really wrong.  It is about time you dinosaurs realize that.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bell inequalities and quantum foundations" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Bell_quantum_found...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/f5b9a3ab-61c8-47cd-84aa-79e7824401b7n%40googlegroups.com.

<CHSHderivation2.jpg>

[Jan-Åke Larsson]

From Bryan's report these quantities do not exist in Fred's computer simulation. That is the error.

/Jan-Åke

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/68EF30D6-D28A-4358-826E-D2C32FDC79F0%40gmail.com.

--
Jan-Åke Larsson
Professor, Head of Department

Department of Electrical Engineering SE-581 83 Linköping Phone: +46 (0)13-28 14 68 Mobile: +46 (0)13-28 14 68 Visiting address: Campus Valla, House B, Entr 27, 3A:512 Please visit us at www.liu.se

[Richard Gill]

He defines them, but does not actually calculate them. He could easily have calculated them too, and he could then also have calculated the actual correlations. Which would satisfy CHSH (up to statistical error).

Sent from my iPad

On 5 Nov 2025, at 17:36, 'Jan-Åke Larsson' via Bell inequalities and quantum foundations <Bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/74416a95-781e-4912-8ebd-e0d9deaf04fc%40liu.se.

[Fred Diether]

Pure nonsense.  You should learn some physics.  B1 happens.  B2 hasn't happened.  So, while mathematically one can say B1 + B2, physically it is nonsense since they never happen at the same time.  If you put some physical time constraints on CHSH, easy to see it is pure nonsense.

[Fred Diether]

More pure nonsense.  B2 is never defined in the simulations.  As is A2 never defined since they are totally un-necessary to prove Bell was wrong.

The last simulation where I did the averaging, there is one degree increments.  So, you can say there is A1 ... A720.  LOL!

[Mark Hadley]

As I said earlier, there is no point doing the maths if you don't understand the basic set up and what it is all about. Your statements and language show that you are clueless and too immature to learn.

B is a mathematical function of hidden variables that predicts the outcome of any measurement that you choose to do. The whole point of an EPR experiment is that there are good physical reasons for thinking that the function B should exist.

Understand the basics first and then follow the equations.

Mark

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/7e9b7f13-d4e4-4a1e-bc9b-76e7432273a4n%40googlegroups.com.

[Fred Diether]

Poor Mark, still completely dense and now really really clueless.  Afraid to try to understand the simulations.

[Mark Hadley]

You are not simulating anything useful or relevant. You don't understand the experiment. Every time you send a message you demonstrate your ignorance.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/79439279-d768-4052-b7ed-a34f5188dddan%40googlegroups.com.

[anton vrba]

This ongoing and seemingly endless discussion reminds me of my first job and the first lesson I had from my boss. He produced this chart

and had following story: Persons in:

Group A are potential managers and supervisors, they will always find efficient solutions, provide precise and to-the-point instructions, etc

Group B are to be used for secondary jobs: eg cleaners

Group C are best suited as factory workers, and

Group D are to be avoided at all cost as they screw up the system with all their new ideas and demands.

Now Fred, I am trying to classify you as either a Group D person who has not done his homework or a Group C person with  Dunning-Kruger syndrome. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect#Definition )

regards

Anton

[fred]

Thanks just what the conversation needed more nonsense 

FD Mobile Sent via the Samsung Galaxy A12

---

From: anton vrba <anto...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 10:16:12 AM
To: Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>
Cc: Bell inequalities and quantum foundations <bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Bell_quantum_foundations] The Mistake in the CHSH Inequality

[Fred Diether]

Yep, that's the ticket!  CHSH is proved to be junk physics.  When B1 exists, there is no B2; when B2 exists there is no B1.  Bell was a good physicist.  He should have realized that.

[Richard Gill]

Bell understood that very well: according to QM there is no B2 when B1 is measured. But according to local realism, there is (in a mathematical sense). After all, according to local realism, it is just a mathematical function of hidden variables lambda and the setting theta_1, if lambda exists and that function exists, then that function of lambda exists too.

Fred, you believe in local realism, right?

You even wrote down what the function was in your Mathematica code.

Bit too subtle for Fred’s brain to comprehend.

Sent from my iPad

On 6 Nov 2025, at 05:00, Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yep, that's the ticket!  CHSH is proved to be junk physics.  When B1 exists, there is no B2; when B2 exists there is no B1.  Bell was a good physicist.  He should have realized that.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bell inequalities and quantum foundations" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Bell_quantum_found...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/693863ac-fb49-4dcf-bf92-15fd3d026564n%40googlegroups.com.

[Jan-Åke Larsson]

What Bell did was show that under the assumption of local realism (so that B2 and B1 both exist) there is a contradiction to QM.

So under QM, when B2 exists there is no B1.

Bell's argument is the reason Fred can make these statements at all, he is just unaware of this. 

Bit to subtle indeed.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/581FC62C-4FF5-4459-891F-C519813B8076%40gmail.com.

[Mark Hadley]

Fred,

As I said many times before you don't understand the basic set up here. Read about EPR type experiments and understand them before you make a fool of yourself talking about the maths.

The hypothesis in BI is that the experimental results can be determined by hidden variables. ALL of classical physics can be. ALL classical probabilities can be defined that way. So BI is asking if QM can be.

EPR then gives an implementation of "local"

How you write that mathematically is with the A and B functions of the hidden variables lambda.

That's a brief introduction. Understand that before you move on.

Mark

--

[Fred Diether]

WOW!  You guys need to learn some basic physics in a bad way!  You have brainwashed yourselves into thinking physics is divided by QM or local realism.  Not entirely your fault.  Physics is physics no matter how you describe it.  If B2 hasn't happened yet, there is no B2.  So, B1 + B2 is impossible.  Can you explain how B2 exists without resorting to fantasies and more extreme nonsense?

[Mark Hadley]

Pay attention!

You don't know what you are talking about. Learn the basics of EPR and LHV theories.

Physics is always predicting the outcome of experiments that have not been done.

If I throw a dice and want to know if it's even or odd, then I can make predictions. If you change your mind and want to know high or low, I can make predictions. And if it's a glass table with Alice looking up at the dice, she can ask her own questions. I can predict all that with a local hidden variable theory. ( I would use a Venn diagram ). EPR and LHV is asking if we can do the same with QM.

Mark

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/534ed773-1fab-4977-82e9-c79de4683620n%40googlegroups.com.

[Fred Diether]

You Bell fanatics live in some kind of weird time machine.  Or maybe you don't think time exists at all?  LOL!

[Austin Fearnley]

"You Bell fanatics live in some kind of weird time machine.  Or maybe you don't think time exists at all?

You have hit upon a relevant metric as there is an adjustment that is needed to our notion of reality and it concerns time.

[Fred Diether]

Correction!  It has to be a time WARP that they live in!  LOL!

[Fred Diether]

CHSH is broken physics.  It's that simple.   Bell was wrong.