Theoretical

I'm not interested ad hominem. Show the math errors.

Not off hand except for my first post in this thread. Because it's simple. Before writing the sim I spent days reading articles and watching videos on Bell's exoerent. I ended up using the experiment outlined by the girls video except I used photons as the particle, but I've read plenty of papers using photons with the same polarization angles. If you have some differnt angles or conditions then let me know and I could run it for you.

I remember answering that. The intent of the sim is to get the results WITHOUT using QM or entanglement.

Show the math error. Saying someone's wrong accomplishes nothing. Nonesense. I won't write a sim that has nothing to do with why I created my sim in the first place. Wrong. My sim has to do with the experiment. Although the thread title contsins hidden variable, as stated from the start I wrote the sim to see if spooky action from a distance was provable.Again:

So now the sim must have multiple hidden variables. Who made you the judge of theories? Your stance is highly debatable. It's pointless to discuss. My sim makes the entire Bell's experiment and theorem pointless because it demonstrates there's nothing special or different with the non entangled photons in this experiment since the experiment gets the exact same results with non-entangled photons that are emitted by two different sources such that they have the same polarity. By the way, my sim does not show what is occurring in "entangled" photons, if anything.

Pointless statement. Mathematical proof is preferred, rather than personal claims about people. And please stay on topic. I'm not the topic. Bell's theorem is not the topic. Bell's experiment is the topic. There's a difference. And my sim with regards to Bell's experiment is the topic.

Quote, "The present status is that no conclusive, loophole-free Bell test has been performed." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem Furthermore, I've read somewhere on Wikipedia that it's impossible to close all loopholes. Status update: To date my sim stands error free, as nobody has been able to find any math errors in it. The sim is extraordinarily simple, and uses the correct equation, Malus' law, which is a well tested equation founded in the 1700's, an equation that works with entangled or non-entangled photons. The sim proves Bell's experiment gets the same results with non-entangled photons by producing two photons with the same polarity.

Thanks but I'm not interested in arguing with you my friend. Have a nice day.

A number is information. If you're saying QM doesn't get any info from its entangled particle when they're separated then I would agree because I'm convinced there's no such spooky action. Maybe that's why QM works. Maybe that's why non-entangled particles get the same results. That is, of course the source must set the polarity of the non entangled particles.

I agree, but we're discussing if info is exchanged. If not then there's a hidden variable.

This is an argument occurring amongst scientists to date. I'm not interested in it because I've already taken sides that no matter how you sugar coast it, the particles go from not knowing to knowing. There are letters written written by Einstein about this. And he debated this a lot.

Indeed. But there is information transferred. According to QM the polarity is unknown. At some point both of the photons must pick the *same* polarity. That's information.

If the event of both entangled photons becoming the same polarity of each other is not instantaneous, then how long is it lol?

Quote, "According to Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity, instantaneous action at a distance was seen to violate the relativistic upper limit on speed of propagation of information. If one of the interacting objects were to suddenly be displaced from its position, the other object would feel its influence instantaneously, meaning information had been transmitted faster than the speed of light." The above Einstein is referring to entanglement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance#Einstein

Nobody said that meant *people* have access to instantaneous communication. QM says the entangled partlcles exhibit such instantaneous communication. It's called spooky action at a distance. I'm not interested in arguing you. I'm not interested in disproving a bunch of hidden variable theories. I'm interested in proving that the bells experiment does not prove spooky action at a distance.

Wikipedia page says "According to Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity, instantaneous action at a distance was seen to violate the relativistic upper limit on speed of propagation of information. If one of the interacting objects were to suddenly be displaced from its position, the other object would feel its influence instantaneously, meaning information had been transmitted faster than the speed of light." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance#Einstein There are lot of quotes of Einstein talking about how spooky action at a distance is wrong. By the way I'm the one who says Einstein did not agree with instantaneous communication.

I agree with you. It's not final until an experiment shows it. Although the cos(angle)^2 equation is so well proven and I've seen it in NEC engine that I'm very confident my sim is correct.

True! Media exaggerates. But still the math shows spooky action at a distance according to most scientists I've heard from.

Well anyone who gets personal over this isn't worth talking to, which is why I'm going to try hard to ignore them. Ok I might on occasion post that they're off topic. Anyhow just ignore uncivilized people. Edit: word correction.

Yes but I've seen many academic scientists on science tv documentary shows state that there is instantaneous action between the particles when they decide their polarity or spin. Einstein knew very well what QM was claiming: Spooky action at a distance.

Pointless statement. That's a personal statement and it is your opinion. Prove it or move on. I have provided the math and code.

The video that described the Bell's experiment that I modeled my sim after is for testing Bell's theorem. The URL had scholar.google.com Stop the personal insults and stay on topic:

It's rather interesting that even though spooky action at a distance clearly implies instantaneous communication, that to date not one single experiment that shows instantaneous communication of information has ever been discovered. So far Einstein was correct about QM.

You gave a google search results. As stated, I went through the list and saw no evidence of spooky action at a distance.

Yes, but I'm pointing out that the experiment whereby spooky action is claimed also gets the same results without entangled photons. Do you see the point?