Re: We are premature to do it now

26 views
Skip to first unread message

Bryan Sanctuary

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 7:13:59 AM8/24/23
to Richard Gill, Bell inequalities and quantum foundations, Jan-Åke Larsson, Alexandre de Castro, Mark Hadley
Hi all

So Richard has wiggled out. It appears Richard is twisting what I say to give himself a reason to capitulate.  I guess he is concerned I will win and the counting issue might end up in my favour. 

You don't see how everything else fits and the ideas that emerged, like a transition from boson to fermion, are valid alternatives to the absurdity of non-locality? 

But you know, keep your enemies closer, I have benefitted from the  comments of this group which have improved my understanding and helped clarify the papers. So the bet helped me a lot.

Yes it was fun.  

BTW Arto and Marten's paper has no non-locality and is another nail in the coffin of Bell's theorem.  It's amazing how so many people accept non-locality, with NO understanding of it, only revelation (weirdness), yet when logical alternatives are presented, they prefer the absurd.

Thanks to all

Bryan






On Wed, Aug 23, 2023, 8:56 p.m. Richard Gill <gill...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Bryan (just to you)

You wrote “we are premature to do it now”.

This is an admission that you realise that you will lose the bet under the terms which we negotiated two years ago.

Thank you, it was fun. You know how much I admire your creativity and obstinacy. It was an honour to do this bet with you.

Richard



Sent from my iPad

Jan-Åke Larsson

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 7:27:46 AM8/24/23
to Bryan Sanctuary, Richard Gill, Bell inequalities and quantum foundations, Alexandre de Castro, Mark Hadley
There are so many errors in Arto and Mårten's paper, it is difficult to even start discussing it. They don't even accept that the probability of a particle with well-defined spin at 0 degrees passing a filter at 45 degrees is 1/2. It goes downhill from there. So no, it contributes nothing.

/Jan-Åke
--
Jan-Åke Larsson
Professor, Head of Department


Linköping University
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

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 7:43:14 AM8/24/23
to Bryan Sanctuary, Bell Inequalities and quantum foundations, Jan-Åke Larsson, Alexandre de Castro, Mark Hadley
I am not wriggling out.

I’m still ready for the evaluation in January and the wager of 5000

Richard Gill

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 9:26:55 AM8/24/23
to Bryan Sanctuary, Bell Inequalities and quantum foundations, Jan-Åke Larsson, Alexandre de Castro, Mark Hadley
Bryan, if we only allow on the jury people who have read and understood your papers and do not see any mistakes in them, then I would lose. Do you understand that? I am not going to give you the satisfaction of winning our bet if that is the way we decide the winner. Yes, I am concerned that if we put a jury together in the way that you want, it might end in your favour.

So: don’t be silly. I read what you said and you seemed to be saying that you need more time. You are the one who is wriggling and wriggling because you know you are going to lose.

R.

On 24 Aug 2023, at 13:13, Bryan Sanctuary <bryancs...@gmail.com> wrote:

Steve Presse

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 11:16:51 AM8/24/23
to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations
Bryan, your requests to have extensive access to referees, treat the editor's decision as recommendations, pick referees, have referees "prove" they understand, etc... is unacceptable by modern academic standards. It sounds like an inquisition--and not at all how we operate in modern science.

Your papers should stand on their own two feet (without infinite supplementary material provided by videos that you have had 2 decades to create and modify). Every academic who submits papers agrees that they cannot pick and badger referees. If this were the case, then I could easily pick and badger any undergrad or postdoc and convince them that I invented general relativity.

Also, you have shown on multiple occasions that you label people who do not agree with you as being part of "quantum business" and "accepting of quantum weirdness". Nothing is further from the truth--the majority of people like me believe that Bell re-hashed in a complicated way what everyone already knew &  "action at a distance" is pure hype (how do you otherwise sell sampling joint distributions of indistinguishable particles?).

Bryan, be reasonable and accept the bet according to modern academic standards of reviewing. Not those concocted by you.

Your conditions are non-starters for any scientist. 

Otherwise Richard should absolutely believe that you have capitulated. As will I.



Steve Presse

unread,
Aug 24, 2023, 12:50:54 PM8/24/23
to Bell inequalities and quantum foundations
I should also add one thing. Bryan: this offer to identify a willing editor and referees is an extreme advantage to you. Most editorial offices reject papers like yours outright. We are offering to find you an established scientist and essentially setting the editorial energy barrier to zero for you.
You should keep this in mind. None of this is to Richard's advantage. Technically, you should be fighting with Editors of proper journals. Instead we are avoiding that fight altogether.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages