REVIEW 1 cited by
Contra Bellum: Bell's theorem as a confusion of languages
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Bell's theorem is a conflict of mathematical predictions formulated within an infinite hierarchy of mathematical models. Inequalities formulated at level $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, are violated by probabilities at level $k+1$. We are inclined to think that $k=0$ corresponds to the the classical world, while the quantum one is $k=1$. However, as the $k=0$ inequalities are violated by $k=1$ probabilities, the same relation holds between $k=1$ inequalities violated by $k=2$ probabilities, $k=-1$ inequalities, violated by $k=0$ probabilities, and so forth. Accepting the logic of the Bell theorem, can we prove by induction that nothing exists?
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Comment on "Unifying Aspects of Generalized Calculus"
Czachor's non-Newtonian calculus is criticized as unfalsifiable and physically inert, but the criticism is undermined by a mischaracterization of the Cantor function and unsupported claims.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.