Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0910.5660

Reply to a comment of I. Schmelzer

Schulz, Benjamin

Published Oct 29, 2009• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This is a reply to the comment of Schmelzer on my earlier paper. In contrast to Schmelzer's claims, it is shown that passive locality does not correspond to the completeness condition of EPR. Nevertheless, it is argued that Schmelzer has found several errors in my article which, fortunately, can be corrected. In spite of Schmelzer's arguments, the Fritsche-Haugk theory can be used to define a local hidden variable theory for the singlet state.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0910.5660

Related papers

Comments on `The question of completeness and locality in Liddy's hidden variable theory'

D E Liddy

Liddy in his reply to Lehr's comment, while not wholly agreeing with the criticism, does concede that the theories he presented are not totally viable.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•May 11, 1985•0 citations

A new look at Bell’s inequalities and Nelson’s theorem

Benjamin Schulz

In 1985, Edward Nelson, who formulated the theory of stochastic mechanics, made an interesting remark on Bell’s theorem. Nelson analysed the latter in the light of classical fields that behave randomly. He found that if a stochastic hidden variable theory fulfils certain conditions, the inequality of Bell can be violated. Moreover, Nelson was able to prove that this may happen without any instantaneous communication between the two spatially separated measurement stations. Since Nelson’s article got almost overlooked by physicists, we try to review his comments on Bell’s theorem. We argue that a modification of stochastic mechanics published recently by Fritsche and Haugk can be extended to a theory which fulfils the requirements of Nelson’s analysis. The article proceeds to derive the quantum mechanical formalism of spinning particles and the Pauli equation from this version of stochastic mechanics. Then, we investigate Bohm’s version of the EPR experiment. Additionally, other setups, like entanglement swapping or time and position correlations, are shortly explained from the viewpoint of our local hidden-variable model. Finally, we mention that this theory could perhaps be relativistically extended.

•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Bell’s theorem and the foundations of quantum physics’ ’’ [Am. J. Phys. 5 6, 567 (1988)]

Henry Pierce Stapp

EPR locality is discussed from the point of view of determinism. (AIP)

American Journal of Physics•Jun 1, 1988•3 citations

A new look at Bell's inequalities and Nelson's theorem

B. Schulz

In 1985, Edward Nelson, who formulated the theory of stochastic mechanics, made an interesting remark on Bell's theorem. Nelson analysed the latter in the light of classical fields that behave randomly. He found that if a stochastic hidden variable theory fulfils certain conditions, the inequality of Bell can be violated. Moreover, Nelson was able to prove that this may happen without any instantaneous communication between the two spatially separated measurement stations. Since Nelson's article got almost overlooked by physicists, we try to review his comments on Bell's theorem. We argue that a modification of stochastic mechanics published recently by Fritsche and Haugk can be extended to a theory which fulfils the requirements of Nelson's analysis. The article proceeds to derive the quantum mechanical formalism of spinning particles and the Pauli equation from this version of stochastic mechanics. Then, we investigate Bohm's version of the EPR experiment. Additionally, other setups, like entanglement swapping or time and position correlations, are shortly explained from the viewpoint of our local hidden-variable model. Finally, we mention that this theory could perhaps be relativistically extended.

arXiv:0807.3369•Annalen der Physik•Mar 20, 2009•1 citation

Response to ‘‘Comment on ‘Bell’s theorem and the foundation of quantum physics’ ’’ [Am. J. Phys. 5 5, 1142 (1987)]

Henry Pierce Stapp

The principle of EPR locality is discussed. (AIP) e

American Journal of Physics•Dec 1, 1987•0 citations

Reply to comment on “A local realist model for correlations of the singlet state" by M.P. Seevinck and J.-Å. Larsson

H. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Seiji Miyashita +1 more

arXiv:0706.2957•The European Physical Journal B•Jul 1, 2007•15 citations
This is a reply to the comment of Schmelzer on my earlier paper. In contrast to Schmelzer's claims, it is shown that passive locality does not correspond to the completeness condition of EPR. Nevertheless, it is argued that Schmelzer has found several errors in my article which, fortunately, can be corrected. In spite of Schmelzer's arguments, the Fritsche-Haugk theory can be used to define a local hidden variable theory for the singlet state.
In 1985, Edward Nelson, who formulated the theory of stochastic mechanics, made an interesting remark on Bell’s theorem. Nelson analysed the latter in the light of classical fields that behave randomly. He found that if a stochastic hidden variable theory fulfils certain conditions, the inequality of Bell can be violated. Moreover, Nelson was able to prove that this may happen without any instantaneous communication between the two spatially separated measurement stations. Since Nelson’s article got almost overlooked by physicists, we try to review his comments on Bell’s theorem. We argue that a modification of stochastic mechanics published recently by Fritsche and Haugk can be extended to a theory which fulfils the requirements of Nelson’s analysis. The article proceeds to derive the quantum mechanical formalism of spinning particles and the Pauli equation from this version of stochastic mechanics. Then, we investigate Bohm’s version of the EPR experiment. Additionally, other setups, like entanglement swapping or time and position correlations, are shortly explained from the viewpoint of our local hidden-variable model. Finally, we mention that this theory could perhaps be relativistically extended.
In 1985, Edward Nelson, who formulated the theory of stochastic mechanics, made an interesting remark on Bell's theorem. Nelson analysed the latter in the light of classical fields that behave randomly. He found that if a stochastic hidden variable theory fulfils certain conditions, the inequality of Bell can be violated. Moreover, Nelson was able to prove that this may happen without any instantaneous communication between the two spatially separated measurement stations. Since Nelson's article got almost overlooked by physicists, we try to review his comments on Bell's theorem. We argue that a modification of stochastic mechanics published recently by Fritsche and Haugk can be extended to a theory which fulfils the requirements of Nelson's analysis. The article proceeds to derive the quantum mechanical formalism of spinning particles and the Pauli equation from this version of stochastic mechanics. Then, we investigate Bohm's version of the EPR experiment. Additionally, other setups, like entanglement swapping or time and position correlations, are shortly explained from the viewpoint of our local hidden-variable model. Finally, we mention that this theory could perhaps be relativistically extended.