At 3:31 PM 10/15/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >The logic I do not argue; the assumptions seem questionable >to me. Do they seem so to you? We know one thing; that what >model we choose does have to conform to the Aspect type >experiments and thus spin cannot be as simple as modelling >of a particle revolving in 3 space.
I agree entirely. In fact, this morning I hopefully figured out a way hidden variables might in fact produce Aspect's results. I have already posted the write-up of this under the thread name "EPR and Bell Revisited". Hope I got it right. Regards, Horace Heffner
