At 10:12 AM 10/17/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:08:54 -0800: >Hi, >[snip] >>There is in fact no way to select from the rows of table 5 to obtain a >>probability of 0.5 in Table 6. This is, in fact, what Bell's inequality >>says. This was Bell's point. >[snip] >I'm probably missing something, but it seems to me that a probability of >0.5 is exactly what one would expect if the spins were totally random and >uncorrelated, i.e. if there were no effect at all, i.e. no hidden >variables, and also no entanglement whatsoever.
Yes that's right. However, when the experiment is done there is always a match if the same axis is chosen. The results are not totally random at all. Just because the axes are chosen at random and Bell's inequality applies only to the total matches, doesn't mean that every result can not be tabulated and compared at a later time. Notice in the sample imaginary experiment tabulation that when Alice and Bob choose the same axis (A and D, B and E, or C and F) they get a perfect match: 800 out of 800. The other axes they get only a 1 in 4 match. Before looking at the situation this way I always thought the communication was primarily needed to get the perfect match. After looking at it this way, it has become clear to me the knowlege of when there is *not* an axis match is at least as important, because the number of matches has to be "decorrelated" down to only one hit in four. By the rules of the experiment, there can be no way to know until approximately the moment of the observations whether there is an axis match or not. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results Regards, Horace Heffner
