Bohmian Locality as an answer to Bell's inequalities

[JosephStang]

You didn't respond to the logic. You just repeated your false claim that geometry is part of math. That's false. The only reason you think it is true is because you are a mathematician.

[Mordred]

Your right I didn't bother responding to your logic. As I stated I lost interest. Particularly when you have statements such as information travelling faster than c that you cannot back up with any real physics or mathematics. This includes your holonomic toroid allowing a faster than c wave. 

This runs counter to well known and understood physics. So any logic based on this is meaningless if you cannot show how that's even possible under mathematics using known physics. Another example is some mysterious toroid travelling at c.  It must be something massless to do that.

However you can't describe it beyond your verbal claims.

I also have no interest in downloading a paper from an outside source when the rules requires that material to presented here..

Who knows you might catch my interest once you start applying some real physics or mathematics. Rather than nothing more substantial than your logic 

Edited April 30 by Mordred

[JosephStang]

Let's try it this way. I've been specific in my wording. I've never said Bell's inequalities are wrong. I've always only said obviated or overcome. 

 

The reason is that the Copenhagen interpretation is just as true as the Holonomic Toroid. The explanation is in found in collision geometry. The Toroid precesses towards the screen, and its precessions bring it closer one wave at a time. It "collides" with the screen anywhere in the Heisenberg sphere and our sub light measuring techniques  cannot pinpoint which precession causes the collision. From sublight observers, both are equally true. 

 

The Toroid, as a theory, has two uses. One, it gives a unifying three dimensional logic to what can obviously be represented in higher dimensions. It also explains how geometry can make space appear curved even if the same effect can be achieved in flat space and gravity as a higher order precession. Two, it gives a shape to engineer around, because it naturally accomplishes the toroidal superposition space while also denominating the hidden variables.

 

It's the theory of everything because it also explains the Copenhagen interpretation, while the reverse is clearly not true, or else Feinman would have. 

[Mordred]

It's really has little to do with how to verbally describe something. Anyone can claim this or that. The wording really doesn't matter.   In order to confirm viability of those claims you need something beyond verbal or pictures etc. That tool is mathematics using known physics. 

A theory has no use whatsoever if it cannot be tested for viability. It's a simple truth I realize it's disappointing to hear that from me but I would lying to state otherwise.

It's easy to describe a toriod under geometry. The mathematics exist for Bohmian guiding wave action so at least a large part of the legwork is available. That would be a good start.

Edited May 6 by Mordred

[Mordred]

8 hours ago, JosephStang said:

Let's try it this way. I've been specific in my wording. I've never said Bell's inequalities are wrong. I've always only said obviated or overcome. 

 

The reason is that the Copenhagen interpretation is just as true as the Holonomic Toroid. The explanation is in found in collision geometry. The Toroid precesses towards the screen, and its precessions bring it closer one wave at a time. It "collides" with the screen anywhere in the Heisenberg sphere and our sub light measuring techniques  cannot pinpoint which precession causes the collision. From sublight observers, both are equally true. 

 

The Toroid, as a theory, has two uses. One, it gives a unifying three dimensional logic to what can obviously be represented in higher dimensions. It also explains how geometry can make space appear curved even if the same effect can be achieved in flat space and gravity as a higher order precession. Two, it gives a shape to engineer around, because it naturally accomplishes the toroidal superposition space while also denominating the hidden variables.

 

It's the theory of everything because it also explains the Copenhagen interpretation, while the reverse is clearly not true, or else Feinman would have. 

For example very little here really makes sense.  I can only assume the first part discusses intrinsic curvature rather than extrinsic. The term dimension in physics refers to effective degrees of freedom it's not strictly a geometric axis. Though x, y,z are effective degrees of freedom so is spin color charge etc etc etc. Some dimensions can even describe a strictly mathematical effective degree of freedom.

You still haven't explained how you get signals from a wave faster than c as a result of your toroids 

 

 

[JosephStang]

It's very obvious that I understood the term dimension as it is used in physics. You defining it for me after I just used it correctly is strange as is your apparent inability to understand clear logic.

[Mordred]

You would be surprised how many ppl we see that don't know how that term is applied. It's simply become habit to define it.  Understanding clear logic doesn't allow one to ignore physics however. As I mentioned numerous times you still haven't addressed your faster than c signals. 

Anyways you seem to refuse to acknowledge that a physics model requires far more than verbal logic.

It's pointless for me to continue trying to provide direction for improvement from you. Good luck with your idea as you seem to feel your idea is complete and requires no improvement I see no point in continuing. Good luck

Just an FYI toroid based models at the quantum level already exist and have been tested for and are still being examined. So it will take far more than verbal logic to be convincing. Although they wouldn't be useful to you from your descriptives of your model idea. They don't make the same claims you do.

Edited May 7 by Mordred