Re: [Bell_quantum_foundations] Abridged summary of bell_quantum_foundations@googlegroups.com - 46 updates in 2 topics

[Eugen Muchowski]

Ake,

I have to correct you. According to my paper, it's like this:

A polarizer with the alpha position on side A selects horizontally and vertically polarized photons from the singlet state in the mass flow ratio ah/av. (ah=cos**2(alpha), av=sin**2(alpha)). They have a polarization of alpha before the measurement. For side B, this means a selection in the mass ratio av/ah due to the initial conditions. As the selection determines the polarization the polarization of the photons selected in this way on side B is then alpha+pi/2. The ratio of the mass flows is therefore determined by the initial conditions and is the same or reciprocal for both sides. This is all local and realistic, but contextual.

Best Regards,

Eugen

Am 09.10.2025 um 05:19 schrieb bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com:

bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

Today's topic summary
View all topics

• Bell's biggest mistake - 40 Updates
• Probable or Causal (Deterministic) QM? That is the question. - 6 Updates

Bell's biggest mistake

Richard Gill <gill...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 06:19AM +0200 It is *not* possible, Alexandre, to give a local hidden-variable framework that reproduces the predictions of quantum mechanics in the context of the EPR-B experiment.   If you think it is possible, ...more

Richard Gill <gill...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 06:26AM +0200 Define “local QM theory”   Many people in QM consider it to be local. It is compatible with relativity theory. It does not allow action at a distance.   A few years back it was shown that ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 02:21AM -0300 Richard, you know very little about the realities of countries outside Europe. I believe that my salary as a researcher at a federal public company in Brazil is higher than that of university ...more

Richard Gill <gill...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 08:29AM +0200 Let's make it 2000 Euro then   I do need to bet. I am not going to waste my time looking for an error. You will deny it is an error. So I ask you to provide objective proof by creating working ...more

Eugen Muchowski <eu...@muchowski.de>: Oct 08 12:23AM -0700 Dear Richard,     You have to think the other way around. It's not about refuting Bell's theorem, but about understanding nature. Bell's theorem only contributes to this insofar as it ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 09:31AM +0200 No Eugen.   You are claiming that, I quote: There are local contextual models with hidden variables that reproduce the quantum correlations. This statement is false.   You must either drop ...more

Austin Fearnley <ben...@hotmail.com>: Oct 08 12:32AM -0700 Hi Richard   Yet you are not worried that you could lose a bet. So you are somewhat suspicious in some respect of the information theoretical principle paper workings? That paper is of interest ...more

Mark Hadley <sunshine...@googlemail.com>: Oct 08 07:00AM -0300 We know it is non local because it violates bells inequalities. Strictly we know that any realistic model must be non local.   ...more

Austin Fearnley <ben...@hotmail.com>: Oct 08 05:31AM -0700 Hi Richard   (Note: you replied to me but not to the group.) I already knew that you would be sure of winning the bet, but the paper you gave a link to could worry me w.r.t physics, maybe. ...more

Austin Fearnley <ben...@hotmail.com>: Oct 08 05:35AM -0700 Sorry, a typo. "implying perhaps that there may be a non-local way to achieve the QM" should be "implying perhaps that there may be a *LOCAL REALIST *way to achieve the QM"   On Wednesday, October ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 02:44PM +0200 QM according to Copenhagen is non-realist in which case the Bell inequality does not apply. Bohmian mechanics gives the same predictions and is realist and nonlocal in which case the Bell ...more

Austin Fearnley <ben...@hotmail.com>: Oct 08 07:39AM -0700 *QM is non-realist.* I agree   *Bohmian Mechanics is non-local. * OK. Guiding waves looks to be a non-local influence. I have not paid attention to Bohm as I avoid waves and work with particle ...more

Алексей Никулов <nikulo...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 05:50PM +0300 Dear Richard,   You claim that it is impossible to disprove Bell’s theorem by doing calculations within quantum mechanics because you didn't want to understand the essence of my article [1]. ...more

Mark Hadley <sunshine...@googlemail.com>: Oct 08 11:56AM -0300 Alexey, You persist in adding unnecessary extra features to QM and then, unsurprisingly you find problems.   The problems are of your making.   The maths speaks for itself.   The underlying ...more

Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 08:30AM -0700 You said "Define local QM theory".   What is it that you don't understand? local? QM? theory?   Well for sure, quantum field theory for particle physics is local.   On Tuesday, October 7, 2025 ...more

Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 08:34AM -0700 So, if QM is local then Bell's theorem is nonsense. Sounds like the inequality argument is circular.   On Wednesday, October 8, 2025 at 3:00:25 AM UTC-7 ...more

Mark Hadley <sunshine...@googlemail.com>: Oct 08 12:42PM -0300 Fred, There are different notions of local:   QT and QFT are both compatible with special relativity, don't allow signalling faster than light and predict probabilities with a local ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 12:47PM -0300 In p. 229, consider the events (a+;b+), (a+;c+), (c+;b+) as equiprobable, and obtain the predictions of quantum mechanics from Bell's inequality.     Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 03:29, Richard Gill ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 06:02PM +0200 Alexandre, you are not making sense, if the probabilities all equal p then the inequality is p <= p+p which is true.   QM violates the inequality in (3.9.15), how do you achieve that?   /JÅ   ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 01:10PM -0300 It’s possible to achieve …   Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 13:02, 'Jan-Åke Larsson' via Bell inequalities and quantum foundations <Bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com> escreveu:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 06:16PM +0200 By all means, tell us.     On 10/8/25 18:10, Alexandre de Castro wrote: ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 01:22PM -0300 I don’t have much to tell. By doing that, you obtain the predictions of quantum mechanics.     Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 13:17, Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se> escreveu:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 07:07PM +0200 Well, Sakurai tells us that using θab=2θac=2θbc=2θ\theta_{ab}=2 \theta_{ac}=2\theta_{bc}=2\theta in the probabilities in (3.9.11), the three probabilities are not equal. Two of them are much ...more

Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 10:22AM -0700 Oh jeez, more nonsense. All action in Nature is local. The rest is just plain nonsense.   On Wednesday, October 8, 2025 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-7 ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 02:26PM -0300 Yup... but since I was curious, I considered the events equally probable and found that it’s possible to obtain the predictions of quantum mechanics.   Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 14:07, Jan-Åke ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 07:50PM +0200 Well, that is no wonder. You need to use specific settings to obtain the contradiction.   For these settings you will not be able to reproduce the quantum predictions from a local realist model. ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 07:52PM +0200 Who said anything about action?   The statement is that you cannot reproduce quantum predictions using a local realist model.   The claim is not that you need nonlocal action.   ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 03:30PM -0300 Yes, I did.   Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 14:50, Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se> escreveu:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 08:38PM +0200 Then by all means, tell us how.   On 10/8/25 20:30, Alexandre de Castro wrote: ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 03:53PM -0300 I don’t have much to tell. By doing that, you obtain the predictions of quantum mechanics   Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 15:39, Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se> escreveu:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 08:56PM +0200 For one specific case. Meaning, not the interesting case.   On 10/8/25 20:53, Alexandre de Castro wrote: ...more

Mark Hadley <sunshine...@googlemail.com>: Oct 08 04:14PM -0300 For any single experimental set up you can reproduce QM results with a classical, local hidden variable theory.   What is both unique and definitive of QM is that there is no classical ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 09:32PM +0200 The Bell inequality combines data from several experiments. The one in Sakurai uses three different experiments.   If you make the probabilities from all three experiments equal, there is ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 05:26PM -0300 There is nothing preventing the framework from being built with uniformly distributed events.     Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 16:32, Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se> escreveu:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 10:28PM +0200 Oh, but there is.   If there is nothing preventing this, across several setups, then show us how.   Explicitly.     On 10/8/25 22:26, Alexandre de Castro wrote: ...more

Alexandre de Castro <alx...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 05:37PM -0300 Sure, I can show you: take the events (a+;b+), (a+;c+), (c+;b+) as equiprobable, and do the calculations   Em qua., 8 de out. de 2025 17:28, Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se> escreveu:   ...more

Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 01:41PM -0700 Oh double jeez, out of context nonsense piled on top of nonsense.   On Wednesday, October 8, 2025 at 10:52:29 AM UTC-7 Jan-Åke Larsson wrote:   ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 10:41PM +0200 That is one special case. This is not general.   You need to do better.   On 10/8/25 22:37, Alexandre de Castro wrote: ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 10:43PM +0200 If you do not want to understand, why are you here?   To ridicule actual scientists?     On 10/8/25 22:41, Fred Diether wrote: ...more

Fred Diether <fredi...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 04:25PM -0700 If you don't know what you did wrong, I'm not going to tell you. And if I see any actual scientists here, I will let you know.   A real scientist would never believe in Bell's nonsense and ...more

Back to top

Probable or Causal (Deterministic) QM? That is the question.

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 07:39AM +0200 Thanks Geraldo, that is a better description. In this particular case I was referring to Anton's setup, and the fact that he would need to bring them to the same spacetime event (same place in ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 08 09:15AM +0200 And to be completely clear, the quotation marks on "interaction" is there because the processes for the two photons are independent. In this particular case, the photons are reflected or ...more

GeraldoAlexandreBarbosa <geraldo...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 05:47AM -0300 👍These are very interesting and subtle subjects. Even more fun if you can access both theory and experiment. Nowadays, due to the lack of a lab, I have to work on non-quantum areas ($ less ...more

anton vrba <anto...@gmail.com>: Oct 08 09:47PM Dear Jan-Åke and Geraldo, I do understand what an entangled state is! However, I must disagree with some of the commonly offered explanations.   Let us return to my Type-I SPDC experimental setup ...more

Mark Hadley <sunshine...@googlemail.com>: Oct 08 06:55PM -0300 Just a warning. ..   A system can be in a 50:50 combination of two states in more than one way.   Classical: it can be a classical mixture   Quantum: it can be a quantum superposition. ...more

Jan-Åke Larsson <jan-ake...@liu.se>: Oct 09 12:00AM +0200 Dear Anton,   First, as Mark says, it is not clear that this produces an entangled state.   Second, even if you do produce an entangled state to say something interesting you need to go beyond ...more

Back to top

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to bell_quantum_found...@googlegroups.com.

[Kupczynski, Marian]

Dear Eugen

You should pay attention to the terminology you are using. Polarizers even in classical physics are not selectors of preexisting properties e.g circularly polarized electromagnetic wave is transformed into linearly polarized wave etc. Polarizers  are creators of contextual properties. Besides local realistic probabilistic  model  by definition, is not contextual. 

Kind regards

Marian 

---

From: bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com <bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Eugen Muchowski <eu...@muchowski.de>
Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2025 2:46 AM
To: bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com <bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Bell_quantum_foundations] Abridged summary of bell_quantum...@googlegroups.com - 46 updates in 2 topics

 

Attention

L’émetteur de ce courriel est externe à l’Université du Québec en Outaouais.

--
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/69C0DDCD-F6A2-4DFE-996A-4D3D776C6A46%40muchowski.de.

[Eugen Muchowski]

Dear Marian,

 with polarizers I mean polarizing beam splitters which, as I assume,  select perpendicularly polarized beams from a linearly polarized beam.

Best regards,

Eugen

[Eugen Muchowski]

Update: The selected beams are preexisting as they are parts of a mixture as I assume

[Jan-Åke Larsson]

With a statistical mixture of linearly polarized photon pairs, the highest visibility you can reach is 50%. This does not violate the Bell inequality.

/Jan-Åke

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/C694B653-EB42-482E-89E9-90195B2B3C61%40muchowski.de.

--
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