It&#x27;s more akin to taking a pair of pennies and giving one to two people in different houses, both of whom have their eyes closed. If the two people immediately open their eyes and look at the penny, they find the two pennies match 80% of the time. OK, no problem, someone sets them so that they match 80% of the time before giving them out. But if they flip the pennies over before opening their eyes, the pennies match only 50% of the time. So clearly something is effecting the state of the pennies after they&#x27;ve been separated.<p>My understanding of Bell&#x27;s inequality is that experiments had two electrons traveling in two different directions, through two different measuring devices measured ended up being measure as spin-up or spin-down when measured at different angles. There were certain levels of correlation when the measurements were done at different angles, but those didn&#x27;t fit when compared to other correlations (IE, you couldn&#x27;t have 90 and 45 degrees match 85% of the time, 45 and 0 match 85% of the time, and 90 and 0 match only 20% of the time).<p>Worth noting that this doesn&#x27;t necessarily mean, as some claim, that &quot;the cards&quot; aren&#x27;t 100% red or blue at any given moment in time. There are certain valid interpretations that are deterministic (De Broglie-Bohm, for example). I believe Bell was in favor of deterministic interpretations.