Now that the dust has settled.

Let us refine the thought experiment a bit for new midwits joining in:
>Imagine you have two billiard balls.
>One billiard ball in an isolated system has a known initial momentum.
>A second billiard ball is placed on a collision course with the first.
>The second ball is stationary relative to the first billiard ball.
>For the exact placement of the second ball, we use a TRNG.
>Therefore we now have a stochastic variable in the contact angle of collision.
>However, the conservation laws still apply, including conservation of momentum.
>Therefore, after the collision, we can measure the momentum of one billiard ball and deduce the momentum of the other by subtracting from the total momentum.

That is ALL that quantum entanglement is, a measurement of quantum variables subject to conservation laws (and yes; it is known to decay in the same way our billiard balls would if the system was not isolated). It is relatively intuitive and uninteresting as far as the realm of quantum mechanics, or mechanics in general for that matter, is concerned. Yet a large amount of grant money has been wasted on extravagant experiments to "prove" that this phenomenon in costly experiments. It is time we pen a letter to Nature end this borderline criminal scam.

Other: A derivation of Bell's Theorem using purely classical laws, from the previous thread:
https://www.sigintsys.com/src/Bell_Prob.pdf

For more background on classical entanglement and the quantum locality issue cf.
>Andrei Khrennikov (2020) Quantum Versus Classical Entanglement: Eliminating the Issue of Quantum Nonlocality, Foundations of Physics volume 50, pages1762–1780