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

The Nature of Causality in Quantum Phenomena

Joseph Berkovitz

Published Jan 1, 2000• 2 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The correlations between distant systems in typical quantum situations, such as Einstein-Podolosky-Rosen experiments, strongly suggest that the quantum realm involves curious types of non-local influences. In this paper, I study in detail the nature of these non-local influences, as depicted by various quantum theories. I show how different quantum theories realise non-locality in different ways, which reflect different ontogical settings

Related papers

Entanglement And The Special Theory Of Relativity

Ilija Barukčić

Abstract: The exact nature of non-locality and entanglement is still a matter of an ongoing controversy. Especially, the concept of non-locality as postulated by the orthodox Copenhagen quantum mechanics is claiming to reflect any non-locality in the quantum realm. Attention should be called to the obvious but very disconcerting fact that the concept of non-locality cannot contradict the theory of special relativity, as long as the same is not refuted theoretically or by experiments. Another way of expressing the peculiar situation is, under conditions of the special theory of relativity it remains rather discomforting to alter the properties of a distant system instantaneously (i. e. no light signal can travel) by acting on a local system. The purpose of this publication is to solve the problem of non-locality and entanglement from the standpoint of the special theory of relativity.

•Jun 1, 2015•0 citations

Can we close the Bohr–Einstein quantum debate?

Marian Kupczyński

Recent experiments allow one to conclude that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated; thus, it is important to understand what this means and how we can explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that Einstein was wrong, Nature is non-local and non-local correlations are produced due to quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space-time? Fortunately, such conclusions are unfounded because, if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model, then Bell-type inequalities may not be proved. We construct a simple probabilistic model allowing these correlations to be explained in a locally causal way. In our model, measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in an irreducibly random way. We explain why, contrary to the general belief, the introduction of setting-dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters' freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow the conclusion that Nature is non-local and that quantum theory is complete, the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is important not only for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena.This article is part of the themed issue 'Second quantum revolution: foundational questions'.

arXiv:1603.00266•Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Oct 2, 2017•29 citations

NONLOCAL CORRELATIONS AND RELATIVITY OF PHYSICAL QUANTITIES

Aleksandr V. Belinsky, I. I. Djadan

Since the paper of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen was published where the quantum nonlocality phenomenon was first problematized many physical explanations for this have been proposed. None of them won full recognition from physicists. Perhaps it is time to consider the issue more broadly with the involvement of non-physical arguments that have an abstract mathematical, general scientific, philosophical and historical projections. This work is an attempt at such a direction.

Metafizika•Jul 17, 2023•1 citation

Quantum Non-Locality: An Epistemological Overview

Michele Caponigro

We present, in this paper, some epistemological positions about quantum non-locality. Each position attempts to resolve philosophic questions raised by QM nonlocality.

Prespacetime journal•Nov 23, 2017•0 citations

Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests?

Marian Kupczyński

Abstract Relativistic invariance is a physical law verified in several domains of physics. The impossibility of faster than light influences is not questioned by quantum theory. In quantum electrodynamics, in quantum field theory and in the standard model relativistic invariance is incorporated by construction. Quantum mechanics predicts strong long range correlations between outcomes of spin projection measurements performed in distant laboratories. In spite of these strong correlations marginal probability distributions should not depend on what was measured in the other laboratory what is called shortly: non-signalling. In several experiments, performed to test various Bell-type inequalities, some unexplained dependence of empirical marginal probability distributions on distant settings was observed. In this paper we demonstrate how a particular identification and selection procedure of paired distant outcomes is the most probable cause for this apparent violation of no-signalling principle. Thus this unexpected setting dependence does not prove the existence of superluminal influences and Einsteinian no-signalling principle has to be tested differently in dedicated experiments. We propose a detailed protocol telling how such experiments should be designed in order to be conclusive. We also explain how magical quantum correlations may be explained in a locally causal way.

arXiv:1709.00708•Open Physics•Jan 1, 2017•29 citations

Can we close the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate

Marian Kupczyński

Recent experiments allowed concluding that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated thus it is important to understand what it means and how can we explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that: Einstein was wrong, Nature is nonlocal and nonlocal correlations are produced due to the quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space-time? Fortunately such conclusions are unfounded because if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model then Bell-type inequalities may not be proven .We construct a simple probabilistic model explaining these correlations in a locally causal way. In our model measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in irreducibly random way. We explain in detail why, contrary to the general belief; an introduction of setting dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters’ freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow concluding that Nature is nonlocal and that quantum theory is complete thus the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is not only important for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena

•Jan 1, 2017•38 citations
The correlations between distant systems in typical quantum situations, such as Einstein-Podolosky-Rosen experiments, strongly suggest that the quantum realm involves curious types of non-local influences. In this paper, I study in detail the nature of these non-local influences, as depicted by various quantum theories. I show how different quantum theories realise non-locality in different ways, which reflect different ontogical settings
Abstract: The exact nature of non-locality and entanglement is still a matter of an ongoing controversy. Especially, the concept of non-locality as postulated by the orthodox Copenhagen quantum mechanics is claiming to reflect any non-locality in the quantum realm. Attention should be called to the obvious but very disconcerting fact that the concept of non-locality cannot contradict the theory of special relativity, as long as the same is not refuted theoretically or by experiments. Another way of expressing the peculiar situation is, under conditions of the special theory of relativity it remains rather discomforting to alter the properties of a distant system instantaneously (i. e. no light signal can travel) by acting on a local system. The purpose of this publication is to solve the problem of non-locality and entanglement from the standpoint of the special theory of relativity.
Recent experiments allow one to conclude that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated; thus, it is important to understand what this means and how we can explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that Einstein was wrong, Nature is non-local and non-local correlations are produced due to quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space-time? Fortunately, such conclusions are unfounded because, if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model, then Bell-type inequalities may not be proved. We construct a simple probabilistic model allowing these correlations to be explained in a locally causal way. In our model, measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in an irreducibly random way. We explain why, contrary to the general belief, the introduction of setting-dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters' freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow the conclusion that Nature is non-local and that quantum theory is complete, the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is important not only for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena.This article is part of the themed issue 'Second quantum revolution: foundational questions'.
Abstract Relativistic invariance is a physical law verified in several domains of physics. The impossibility of faster than light influences is not questioned by quantum theory. In quantum electrodynamics, in quantum field theory and in the standard model relativistic invariance is incorporated by construction. Quantum mechanics predicts strong long range correlations between outcomes of spin projection measurements performed in distant laboratories. In spite of these strong correlations marginal probability distributions should not depend on what was measured in the other laboratory what is called shortly: non-signalling. In several experiments, performed to test various Bell-type inequalities, some unexplained dependence of empirical marginal probability distributions on distant settings was observed. In this paper we demonstrate how a particular identification and selection procedure of paired distant outcomes is the most probable cause for this apparent violation of no-signalling principle. Thus this unexpected setting dependence does not prove the existence of superluminal influences and Einsteinian no-signalling principle has to be tested differently in dedicated experiments. We propose a detailed protocol telling how such experiments should be designed in order to be conclusive. We also explain how magical quantum correlations may be explained in a locally causal way.
Recent experiments allowed concluding that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated thus it is important to understand what it means and how can we explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that: Einstein was wrong, Nature is nonlocal and nonlocal correlations are produced due to the quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space-time? Fortunately such conclusions are unfounded because if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model then Bell-type inequalities may not be proven .We construct a simple probabilistic model explaining these correlations in a locally causal way. In our model measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in irreducibly random way. We explain in detail why, contrary to the general belief; an introduction of setting dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters’ freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow concluding that Nature is nonlocal and that quantum theory is complete thus the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is not only important for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena