d2634464   
   From: seki.hajime01@gmail.com   
      
   On Sunday, February 11, 2018 at 1:15:46 AM UTC+9, Mikko wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   >  SEKI wrote:   
   >   
   > > This question is, however, about assumptions (2) and (3).   
   > > If these assumptions are correct, Bell's arguments are to lose their   
   > > meaning completely.   
   >   
   > No, they don't. You have not shown any connection from your assumptions   
   > to Bell's arguments.   
   >   
      
   As I already wrote in a number of previous postings, if the assumptions   
   are correct, spin/polarization directions of paired particles are to be   
   determined when they are produced, and are to be biased in accordance   
   with the experimental setting.   
      
   It is well-known what nature an emitted photon has in induced/stimulated   
   emission.   
      
   Then, any question?   
      
   SEKI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)