How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ is real

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by feoren on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @05:35PM (#27899686)

Fine, you got me: the assertion that is obviously true, but goes further in that it invalidates the need for any of this discussion. If your goal was to engage me in a thought-measuring contest, sure, you win: you've spent more time thinking about this utterly ridiculous nonsense than I have. Congrats?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by cepie on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @05:51PM (#27899855)

I bet you could make your points without insulting others. What do you think?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by feoren on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @07:03PM (#27900390)

I think my tone was no different than naasking's.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by naasking on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @09:05PM (#27901139)

Yeah, saying I think you're likely confused, as I did, is not remotely the same as calling subjects that interest some people "insane drivel", or "utterly ridiculous nonsense". You definitely need to recalibrate your scale IMO.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Bell’s Theorem proved ‘spooky action at a distance’ i... by naasking on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @05:40PM (#27899742)

If you're not interested in philosophical discussions, then why engage at all, particularly only to denigrate people who like exploring thought experiments?

[ Parent | on HN ]