I'm not a physicist, so don't kill me. Why isn't Bell's theorem discussed? Bell's theorem puts a big hole in hidden variable theories (stating that no local hidden variable theory can exist). One would have to make a serious jump to non-local hidden variable theories in order to have ANY hidden variable theory. Am I right in saying that there's no evidence or theoretical proof that says information can move faster than the speed of light? How could one even consider hidden variable theories without making that jump to assume information can move faster than the speed of light? Even if the speed of light is beatable, how would we prove it? The bias in the physics section is leaning towards is determinism because it says hidden variable theories could happen, it doesn't mention Bell's theorem, AND it makes a terrible counter-argument to hidden variable theories using that number genorator nonsense. As Gibbzmann said, this seems to put hidden variable deterministic theories on par with indeterministic theories by having Bell's theorem absent. Determinism and hidden variable theories may make people happy, but Bell's theorem says otherwise on the topic of local hidden variable theories. As Gibbzmann said, science has no grace with personal tastes. (  )