I'm afraid I don't qualify for being able to do that, but I feel like I'm tantalizingly close to understanding this overall - but I'm finding it hard to understand why the lower-right "TT" quadrant is transposed in the S=2.828 example (the red box in the diagram). Maybe it's obvious if one understands it better?
In the article, I first show how to "break" the Bell inequality without making a reference to any complicated math or Physics, this is the section "Breaking the Bell inequality with non-local information", which uses the dice roll example. This is on purpose, for pedagogical reasons, and this is why the Python approach imo is so useful to demonstrate this whole thing: the key idea is, to break the inequality, you need to "peek" at the other side.
Then, the next mental step is simply the statement that, in "real life", you can prepare a composite system (eg. 2 photons modeled as 2 qubits) that you can seperate (modeled as the split() function in Python), you can send the 2 parts to two different observers, they use a certain measurement setup, and the whole game is played, statistic computed, etc. and then you get this value 2.82 (which breaks the Bell inequality)! So somehow, the 2 qubits are doing that we can only model [in Python] as peeking!
The actual derivation of how to get that 2.82 is, in some sense, almost like a a detail. I think with this approach, even a non-physicist can understand what this whole argument is (=Bell's genius).
"a talented college physics student can do it" - I'm a Physicist, but I'm not working as a Physicist, and I was able to derive all the numbers in that table by hand with pen & paper directly. I figured if I can do it 15 years out of school, so can a talented college physics student!
The next article will be that derivation [of the raw probabilities], I just need to transcribe it from my notebook to Latex and clean it up. If you want to see the original notes:
It's related to the fact that the expected value of A_1 tensor B_1 is negative 1/sqrt(2), whilst the expected value of all other tensor products are positive 1/sqrt(2).
> Although the diagram using green dots only confuses :)
It's very confusing. In particular it does not say that the box have 3 doors until the middle of the explanations. Also, I don't find the example very similar to the Bell's Inequality.
Moreover, I expect in a quantum system that when both open the same door they get the same result (or the oposite) so in a quantum system I expect that when both open the same door they get 100% (or 0%) agreement, so insted of 50% I expect 1/3 * 100% + 2/3 * 50 % = 66% (or 1/3 * 0% + 2/3 * 50 % = 33%).
Anyway, in some versions of the Bell's Inequality the doors of the boxes are "misalignment" so on box has white-gray-black doors and the other has another ser of colors. let's say creme-pink-brown doors. You never have a 100% or 0% of coincidences of the results.
I'm afraid I don't qualify for being able to do that, but I feel like I'm tantalizingly close to understanding this overall - but I'm finding it hard to understand why the lower-right "TT" quadrant is transposed in the S=2.828 example (the red box in the diagram). Maybe it's obvious if one understands it better?