Astronomy and Astrophysics – Astrophysics
Scientific paper
Apr 2002
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2002aps..apro12003s&link_type=abstract
American Physical Society, April Meeting, Jointly Sponsored with the High Energy Astrophysics Division (HEAD) of the American As
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Astrophysics
Scientific paper
The conclusions arrived at in a mathematical theorem are necessarily supported by the results of any given physical experiment, if the physical conditions prevailing in the experiment do satisfy all the premises of the theorem in question. In case the experimental results (R) do, indeed, contradict the prediction of a particular theorem (T), it becomes pertinent to find out from the LOGICAL ANGLE what the WHOLE SET (S) of premises is. If S contains only one sharply defined premise that is not satisfied, one may claim that to be the cause of the discrepancy between R and the prediction from T. Otherwise, the situation is much more complex. It is argued in this paper that many simplistic conclusions such as Einstein lost, Bohr won are not warranted (in connection with the application of Bells theorem to Physics experiments). Rather, something else (suggested by the authors theory of the Foundations of Reality, and elaborated in this article) appears more plausible.
No associations
LandOfFree
O the Falsity of Certain Conclusions Commonly Drawn from Applying Bell's Theorem to Physics Experiments does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with O the Falsity of Certain Conclusions Commonly Drawn from Applying Bell's Theorem to Physics Experiments, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and O the Falsity of Certain Conclusions Commonly Drawn from Applying Bell's Theorem to Physics Experiments will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1538858