Bell proved that no theory of pre-existing local values can reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics, but his proof leaves the culprit ambiguous: one may reject either of two independence conditions, Outcome Independence or Parameter Independence, and most commentators have found Outcome Independence the safer sacrifice. The first part of this paper presents, in a form adapted to spin-1/2 particles in the singlet state, an argument (Forster 2014) that removes the ambiguity: using a chained family of experiments in which quantum mechanics predicts an extreme pattern of correlations -- the quantum Sorites phenomenon -- a contradiction is derived without ever assuming Outcome Independence. Under the resulting theorem, anyone who holds that hidden variables could improve on the quantum probabilities must give up Parameter Independence itself. That looks like a heavy price, because Parameter Independence appears to be protected twice over: rejecting it seems to put superluminal influences into spacetime, and its statistical shadow -- the No-Signaling condition -- is experimentally beyond reproach The second part of the paper shows that the price is payable. In the random-matrix collapse dynamics proposed by Kryukov, measurement is a random walk of the quantum state, and the hidden variable is not a stock of values fixed at the source but the random stream that drives the walk -- like the stored random numbers of a computer simulation, with the measurement settings playing the role of seeds. In that framework Parameter Independence is false while Outcome Independence and No-Signaling are both true, and one can say exactly how the Sorites argument is blocked, why the violation involves no process propagating in spacetime, and why the influence of one wing's setting on the other wing's outcome -- demonstrated here in a simulation -- can never be used to send a message.
Bell proved that no theory of pre-existing local values can reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics, but his proof leaves the culprit ambiguous: one may reject either of two independence conditions, Outcome Independence or Parameter Independence, and most commentators have found Outcome Independence the safer sacrifice. The first part of this paper presents, in a form adapted to spin-1/2 particles in the singlet state, an argument (Forster 2014) that removes the ambiguity: using a chained family of experiments in which quantum mechanics predicts an extreme pattern of correlations -- the quantum Sorites phenomenon -- a contradiction is derived without ever assuming Outcome Independence. Under the resulting theorem, anyone who holds that hidden variables could improve on the quantum probabilities must give up Parameter Independence itself. That looks like a heavy price, because Parameter Independence appears to be protected twice over: rejecting it seems to put superluminal influences into spacetime, and its statistical shadow -- the No-Signaling condition -- is experimentally beyond reproach The second part of the paper shows that the price is payable. In the random-matrix collapse dynamics proposed by Kryukov, measurement is a random walk of the quantum state, and the hidden variable is not a stock of values fixed at the source but the random stream that drives the walk -- like the stored random numbers of a computer simulation, with the measurement settings playing the role of seeds. In that framework Parameter Independence is false while Outcome Independence and No-Signaling are both true, and one can say exactly how the Sorites argument is blocked, why the violation involves no process propagating in spacetime, and why the influence of one wing's setting on the other wing's outcome -- demonstrated here in a simulation -- can never be used to send a message.
Bell's theorem rests on three assumptions: locality, determinism, and measurement independence. Experiments violate Bell inequalities, so at least one assumption must be abandoned. The first two exits are well explored; the third — allowing lawful, partial correlation between measurement settings and hidden variables — is usually dismissed as "superdeterminism" and assumed to require total conspiracy. This paper computes what that third exit actually costs. Hall (2010) priced the bipartite case exactly: 13.81% of measurement independence must be surrendered to reproduce singlet-state correlations. This work extends that program to multipartite GHZ/Mermin scenarios and computes, via exact linear programming, the minimum measurement dependence required to reproduce the full faithful statistics — every correlator and every marginal — for 3 through 13 parties. The floors climb a lawful staircase: 1/3, 2/5, 4/9, 8/17, 16/33, 32/65, all obeying the closed form F = R/(2(R+1)) with R the Mermin violation ratio. A proven universal ceiling shows the required dependence never exceeds 1/2 at any experiment size: quantum statistics never force total superdeterminism. The optimal hidden-variable distributions take a closed physical form — uniform measures on the ground states of the prepared state's frustrated stabilizer Hamiltonian — confirmed out-of-sample on cluster states. The result answers a question Hall posed and left open in 2011, and supplies an answer key against which every published lawful-measurement-dependence program (invariant-set theory, cellular-automaton interpretations, future-input dynamics, all-at-once retrocausality, and the displacement-condensate framework of the present authors) is graded in its own formalism. Operationally, the floors are counterfeiting thresholds for multipartite device-independent certificates. Every exact value is machine-verified on independent hardware and reproducible in under one minute from the linked repository: github.com/RandomInternetPreson/moire-phase-space-sampler (DST_Bell_MI directory). Also available at ai.viXra.org/abs/2607.0049.Version 2 (Oct 2026): closed form proved for all n; cluster-core census with exact certificates; scripts and run logs added.
The experimental violation of the Bell inequality establishes necessary but not sufficient conditions that any theory must obey. Namely, a theory compatible with the experimental observations can satisfy at most two of the three hypotheses at the basis of Bell's theorem: free will, no signaling, and outcome independence. Quantum mechanics satisfies the first two hypotheses but not the latter. Experiments not only violate the Bell inequality, but show an excellent agreement with quantum mechanics. This fact restricts further the class of admissible theories. In this work, the author determines the form of the hidden-variable models that reproduce the quantum mechanical predictions for a spin singlet while satisfying both the hypotheses of free will and no signaling. Two classes of hidden-variable models are given as an example, and a general recipe to build infinitely many possible models is provided.
In the debate of the foundations of quantum theory (QM), Bell’s theorem [1] is an important milestone. Based on Einstein’s criticism of completeness [2], Bell formulated an expression for the correlation between distant spin measurements such as described by Bohm [3]. In Bell’s expression, hidden variables to restore locality and causality to the theory (LHV’s) are introduced through a probability (mass) density function and through their influence upon the elementary measurement functions in the two separate wings (denoted by the Aand the B-wing) of the experiment. Many experiments and theoretical developments arose from Bell’s original paper. The most important experiment was performed by Aspect [4]. Aspect’s results were interpreted as a confirmation of the completeness of quantum mechanics. From that point, QM was considered a non-local theory. In a previous paper [5] the present author argued that there was insufficient ground for this conclusion. The author would like to point that merely an appeal to the simplicity and apparent logical truth of Bell’s theorem is advanced to support the exclusive non-locality interpretation. Beyond that, there is no proof that experimental results must exclusively be interpreted in this manner. According to the author the inequalities of Bell were given the status of theorem without sufficient supportive evidence save simplicity. In this paper it will be demonstrated that such a conclusive supportive argument of Bell’s theorem does not exist because an approximate classical model is possible. The principles of the proposed model can also be expressed in numerical terms. This enables numerical simulation of the experiments on a computer. Let us shortly describe a typical idealized Bell experiment. In such an experiment, from a single source, two particles with opposite spin are sent into opposite directions. For instance, we could think of a positron and an electron arising from para-Positronium that are drawn apart by dipole radiation. Subsequently, in the respective wings of the experimental set-up, the spin of the individual particle is measured with a SternGerlach magnet. The measurements are found to be correlated with the, unitary, parameter vectors of the magnets, a = (a1, a2, a3),b = (b1, b2, b3). It is well-known that the QM correlation for singlet state electron and positron is equal to,
Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) have designed a gedanken experiment that suggested a theory that was more complete than quantum mechanics. The EPR design was later realized in various forms, with experimental results close to the quantum mechanical prediction. The experimental results by themselves have no bearing on the EPR claim that quantum mechanics must be incomplete nor on the existence of hidden parameters. However, the well known inequalities of Bell are based on the assumption that local hidden parameters exist and, when combined with conflicting experimental results, do appear to prove that local hidden parameters cannot exist. This fact leaves only instantaneous actions at a distance (called "spooky" by Einstein) to explain the experiments. The Bell inequalities are based on a mathematical model of the EPR experiments. They have no experimental confirmation, because they contradict the results of all EPR experiments. In addition to the assumption that hidden parameters exist, Bell tacitly makes a variety of other assumptions; for instance, he assumes that the hidden parameters are governed by a single probability measure independent of the analyzer settings. We argue that the mathematical model of Bell excludes a large set of local hidden variables and a large variety of probability densities. Our set of local hidden variables includes time-like correlated parameters and a generalized probability density. We prove that our extended space of local hidden variables does permit derivation of the quantum result and is consistent with all known experiments.
Two EPR arguments are reviewed, for their own sake, and for the purpose of clarifying the status of “stochastic“ hidden variables. The first is a streamlined version of the EPR argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics. The role of an anti-instrumentalist (“realist”) interpretation of certain probability statements is emphasized. The second traces out one horn of a central foundational dilemma, the collapse dilemma; complex modal reasoning, similar to the original EPR, is used to derive determinateness (of all spin components of two spin-½ particles in the singlet state) from just (a form of) weak locality, result definiteness, and an assumption on propensities based on conservation. Theories meeting these conditions are therefore constrained by the Bell inequalities. Neither controversial assumptions of “strong locality” (“factorability”) nor of determinism are employed in the derivation. The categories of “stochastic hidden variables” are then analyzed; one can focus on “quasi-definite” theories, without loss of generality. A means of excluding these is proposed, based on a demand that certain ideal cases be accurately treated. Theorems from quantum measurement theory, sometimes cited as showing that such cases are not physically possible, are found inapplicable.
Bell’s theorem teaches us that there are quantum correlations that can not be simulated by just shared randomness (Local Hidden variable). There are some recent results which simulate singlet correlation by using either 1 cbit or a binary (no-signaling) correlation which violate Bell’s inequality maximally. But there is one more possible way to simulate quantum correlation by relaxing the condition of independency of measurement on shared randomness. Recently, MJW Hall showed that the statistics of singlet state can be generated by sacrificing measurement independence where underlying distribution of hidden variables depend on measurement direction of both parties [Phys. Rev. Lett.105 250404 (2010)]. He also proved that for any model of singlet correlation, 86 % measurement independence is optimal. In this paper, we show that 59 % measurement independence is optimal for simulating singlet correlation when the underlying distribution of hidden variables depend only on measurements of one party. We also show that a distribution corresponding to this optimal lack of free will, already exists in literature which first appeared in the context of detection efficiency loophole. I.