Proof Mind is Fundamental and Matter Doesn't Exist

[Captain Scarlet]

that is not what i said... you even quoted my specific statement and still didn't address it. i didn't say anything about the Kochen-Specker theorem debunking Bohmian mechanics... i said violations of the Leggett inequality debunked the idea of non-local hidden variables... which are the last refuge of a deterministic/realist model for reality since local hidden variables were already falsified. the unique role of the observer cannot be denied in QM anymore.

of course they have some poetic license... but that doesn't take away from the fact that Leggett's inequality was violated, and thus non-local hidden variables have been falsified.

yes... the inequality was made to back up the theory of non-local hidden variables... but you apparently missed that it was shown the inequality was violated in 2007. it was shown to be violated by Anton Zeilinger and his team. and if you want to throw quote out, why not look at one by Zeilinger [snip]

OK good so we agree the Kochen-Specker point does not debunk Bohmian Mechanics and you point out that only the Leggatt inequality stands between a viable interpretation of QM and realism/determinism as envisgaed in Bohmian Mechanics.  You also quote Anton Zeilinger, good we can work with that as well.  The paper that gave rise to the article in physics world was part of Zeilingers research.  He and his team wrote the paper "An experimental test of non-local realism".  You are quite right that the paper suggests that we should seriously question realism and offers data to support that perspective.  It then goes on to state (and I quote directly from the paper bearing Zeilingers name):

“It is clear that other classes of non-local theories, possibly even fully compliant with all QM  predictions, might exist that do have this property when re-producing entangled states.  Such theories include additional communication or dimensions.  A specific case deserving comment is Bohm’s theory.  There the non-local correlations are a consequence of  the non-local quantum potential, which exerts suitable torque on the particles leading to experimental results compliant with QM”

In other words it specifically states the the violation of Leggatt inequalities does not rule out Bohmian Mechanics.  Thus Bohmian Mechanics is a defeater to your claims, unless you contest that Bohmian Mechanics does not allow for an interpretation of Realism.  Other discussion on this topic amongst the physics community goes further stating that their findings could actually be interpreted as support for Bohmian Mechanics (you can search for a criticism of An experimental test of non-local realism for the full text.  But here is a salient section:

“To summarize, what can one conclude from the violation of Leggett’s inequality? The logical conclusion is that Leggett’s hypothesis is false, i.e., that a theory that contains the hidden variables u and v proposed by Leggett cannot be empirically viable. That doesn’t tell us anything about determinism or any type of philosophical realism. A title like “An experimental test of non-local realism” is severely misleading: it could, for instance, lead some readers into believing that the experiment reported by the article makes a theory like Bohmian Mechanics more implausible while it is exactly the other way around: a prediction of Bohmian Mechanics has been experimentally verified and a class of alternatives to it has been shown not to be viable.”

Now I am not saying I am wedded to Bohmian Mechanics just that it is a defeater of your claims.  Furthermore even if it wasn't we haven't ruled out Quantum Field Theory nor other realist QM interpretations (although I agree they have problems, but I guess if they didn't we would have near uninimity on reality).