User talk:71.188.81.250

Are you stating that Morales's experiment is bogus? Other than unsubstantiated opinion, what evidence do you have to support your opinion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.81.250 (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Bell's theorem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Re: Bell's theorem. Please use the talk page before any edit. And wait for consensus before posting non WP:RS material. Limit-theorem (talk) 23:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

71.188.81.250 (talk) 05:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)I am waiting for actual evidence to support that Morales' experiment is bogus and therefore not worthy of mention. To be clear, every human being can confirm Morales's findings for themselves and so censorship of these published findings only make WP a participant in disinformation.

Take for example, "In order for the argument for Bell's inequality to follow, it is necessary to be able to speak meaningfully of what the result of the experiment would have been, had different choices been made." This statement is erroneous in that what is necessary is how the experiment can obtain results to begin with. What the Morales No-Go Experiment confirms is that it is impossible for a tester to conduct any and all experiments without the function of a direct or indirect selection. More importantly, his empirical evidence confirms that the effect we call choice (selection) can not preexist. It is an effect that can only come to exist thus making the function of selection nonlocal and therefore, hidden variables.

71.188.81.250 (talk) 04:58, 6 July 2019 (UTC) MaxwellMolecule deleted the "Morales No-Go Experiment” entry claiming that it was "not supported by the lack of evidence of no "reliable source”. Would a journal published by a country's national academy of science be considered a “reliable source” and who gives anyone the right to decide such an arbitrary classification?