"[R]enunciation of the visualisation of atomic phenomena is imposed upon us by the impossibility of their subdivision ..." - Niels Bohr, Discussions with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics

A thought experiment follows in which a visualizable model of a rotating disc replicates the prediction of quantum mechanics with respect to coincidence of observation of entangled particles.

1. A planet ringed at its equator is observed from various angles along a single 360° longitude intersecting both poles.
2. The observation is limited and lacking any depth of field but consistent.
   
3. The planet itself is invisible and effectively transparent.
4. The ring system is sparsely populated with mass, effectively a semi-transparent disc whose direction of rotation is noted as best can be determined.
5. If the ring system is observed equator-on, the ring motion in opposite directions is observed superimposed with no depth of field.
6. A observation always results in a binary direction of rotation, 1 or 0 (or left and right).
   
7. The superimposed observation of the ring system is increasingly disambiguated by the approach of the angle of observation to 0° or 180°, i.e., directly over either pole.
8. As the observation moves towards the equator-on view, the binary result chosen by the observation is increasingly determined by local conditions.
9. Any such local conditions are consistent and two observations equator-on 180° apart would yield opposite unreliable results.
   
10. cos θ is thus the reliability of an observation from angle θ measured for 90° from the equator towards either pole.
11. cos θ' is then the probability of a coincidence of two such observations where θ' is the angle up to 90° between two observers where the angle crosses a pole.
    
12. This replicates the prediction of quantum mechanics with respect to coincidence of observation of entangled particles.
• "When observations at an angle of θ are made on two entangled particles, the predicted correlation is cosθ." - Wikipedia, Bell's Inequality.

I'm interested in your comments.