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

Journal of Modern Physics

And If Bell’s Inequality Were Not Violated

Olivier Serret

Published Jan 1, 2014• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

It briefly recalls the theory of Bell’s inequality and some experimental measures. Then measurements are processed on one hand according to a property of the wave function, on the other hand according to the sum definition. The results of such processed measures are apparently not the same, so Bell’s inequality would not be violated. It is a use of the wave function which implies the violation of the inequality, as it can be seen on the last flowcharts.

DOI
10.4236/jmp.2014.514137

Related papers

A note on the violation of Bell's inequality

Thomas Schürmann

With Bell's inequalities one has a formal expression to show how essentially all local theories of natural phenomena that are formulated within the framework of realism may be tested using a simple experimental arrangement. For the case of entangled pairs of spin-1/2 particles we propose an alternative measurement setup which is consistent to the necessary assumptions corresponding to the derivation of the Bell inequalities. We find that the Bell inequalities are never violated with respect to our suggested measurement process.

arXiv:1703.10030•Mar 17, 2017•1 citation

What exactly is proved by the violation of Bell's inequality?

Gerold Gründler

Bell's inequality has been derived several times from quite different basic assumptions, which imply different conclusions. This resulted into widespread confusion regarding the exact implications of the experimental violations of the inequality. In this article, the structures of Bell's and of Peres' derivations are analyzed, and the title question is explicitly answered.

arXiv:1704.03856•Apr 11, 2017•0 citations

Non-Boolean hidden variable model reproduces Quantum Mechanics’ predictions for Bell’s experiment.

Alejandro Andrés Hnilo

Abstract The experimentally verified violation of Bell’s inequalities apparently implies that at least one of two beliefs, which are accepted as true in almost all scientific practice, must be false. These beliefs are: that effects propagating at infinite velocity do not exist, and that natural phenomena occur independently of being observed. Giving up any one of these two beliefs (usually known together as Local Realism) is controversial. For many years, many theories have been proposed to reconcile the violation of Bell’s inequalities with Local Realism, but none has been fully successful. In this paper, it is recalled that Bell’s inequalities are equivalent to the conditions to decide the completeness of a theory according to Boolean logic. Therefore, any theory aimed to violate Bell’s inequalities must start by giving up Boolean logic. Two problems are therefore defined: the “soft” one is to explain the violation of Bell’s inequalities without violating (non-Boolean) Local Realism; the “hard” one is to predict the time values when single particles are detected, in such a way that the resulting number of coincidences violates Bell’s inequalities. A simple hidden variables model is introduced, which solves the “soft” problem even in an ideal setup. This is possible thanks to the use of vectors in real space as the hidden variables and the corresponding operation (projection), which do not hold to Boolean logic. This model reconciles the violation of Bell’s inequalities with Local Realism and should end a controversy that has lasted for decades. Regarding the “hard” problem, the introduced model is as incomplete as Quantum Mechanics is. It is claimed that solving the “hard” problem requires devising a new kind of quantum computer, which should be able to accept (non-Boolean) hidden variable values as input data and to replace the statistical Born’s rule of Quantum Mechanics with a deterministic threshold condition.

•Aug 17, 2022•0 citations

EPR paradox, quantum nonlocality and physical reality

Marian Kupczyński

Eighty years ago Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen demonstrated that instantaneous reduction of wave function, believed to describe completely a pair of entangled physical systems, led to EPR paradox. The paradox disappears in statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) according to which a wave function describes only an ensemble of identically prepared physical systems. QM predicts strong correlations between outcomes of measurements performed on different members of EPR pairs in far-away locations. Searching for an intuitive explanation of these correlations John Bell analysed so called local realistic hidden variable models and proved that correlations consistent with these models satisfy Bell inequalities which are violated by some predictions of QM and by experimental data. Several different local models were constructed and inequalities proven. Some eminent physicists concluded that Nature is definitely nonlocal and that it is acting according to a law of nonlocal randomness. According to these law perfectly random, but strongly correlated events, can be produced at the same time in far away locations and a local and causal explanation of their occurrence cannot be given. We strongly disagree with this conclusion and we prove the contrary by analysing in detail some influential finite sample proofs of Bell and CHSH inequalities and so called Quantum Randi Challenges. We also show how one can win so called Bell's game without violating locality of Nature. Nonlocal randomness is inconsistent with local quantum field theory, with standard model in elementary particle physics and with causal laws and adaptive dynamics prevailing in the surrounding us world. The experimental violation of Bell-type inequalities does not prove the nonlocality of Nature but it only confirms a contextual character of quantum observables and gives a strong argument against counterfactual definiteness and against a point of view according to which experimental outcomes are produced in irreducible random way.

arXiv:1602.02959•Journal of Physics Conference Series•Mar 1, 2016•27 citations

The experimental violation of Bell's inequality [as predicted by quantum mechanics]: A contribution to the study of its meaning

Bertrand Hespel

•Jan 1, 2001•0 citations

Nonlinear Bell inequality for macroscopic measurements

Adam Bene Watts, Nicole Yunger Halpern, Aram W. Harrow

The correspondence principle suggests that quantum systems grow classical when large. Classical systems cannot violate Bell inequalities. Yet agents given substantial control can violate Bell inequalities proven for large-scale systems. We consider agents who have little control, implementing only general operations suited to macroscopic experimentalists: preparing small-scale entanglement and measuring macroscopic properties while suffering from noise. That experimentalists so restricted can violate a Bell inequality appears unlikely, in light of earlier literature. Yet we prove a Bell inequality that such an agent can violate, even if experimental errors have variances that scale as the system size. A violation implies nonclassicality, given limitations on particles' interactions. A product of singlets violates the inequality; experimental tests are feasible for photons, solid-state systems, atoms, and trapped ions. Consistently with known results, violations of our Bell inequality cannot disprove local hidden-variables theories. By rejecting the disproof goal, we show, one can certify nonclassical correlations under reasonable experimental assumptions.

arXiv:1911.09122•Physical Review A•Jan 27, 2021•5 citations
It briefly recalls the theory of Bell’s inequality and some experimental measures. Then measurements are processed on one hand according to a property of the wave function, on the other hand according to the sum definition. The results of such processed measures are apparently not the same, so Bell’s inequality would not be violated. It is a use of the wave function which implies the violation of the inequality, as it can be seen on the last flowcharts.
With Bell's inequalities one has a formal expression to show how essentially all local theories of natural phenomena that are formulated within the framework of realism may be tested using a simple experimental arrangement. For the case of entangled pairs of spin-1/2 particles we propose an alternative measurement setup which is consistent to the necessary assumptions corresponding to the derivation of the Bell inequalities. We find that the Bell inequalities are never violated with respect to our suggested measurement process.
Abstract The experimentally verified violation of Bell’s inequalities apparently implies that at least one of two beliefs, which are accepted as true in almost all scientific practice, must be false. These beliefs are: that effects propagating at infinite velocity do not exist, and that natural phenomena occur independently of being observed. Giving up any one of these two beliefs (usually known together as Local Realism) is controversial. For many years, many theories have been proposed to reconcile the violation of Bell’s inequalities with Local Realism, but none has been fully successful. In this paper, it is recalled that Bell’s inequalities are equivalent to the conditions to decide the completeness of a theory according to Boolean logic. Therefore, any theory aimed to violate Bell’s inequalities must start by giving up Boolean logic. Two problems are therefore defined: the “soft” one is to explain the violation of Bell’s inequalities without violating (non-Boolean) Local Realism; the “hard” one is to predict the time values when single particles are detected, in such a way that the resulting number of coincidences violates Bell’s inequalities. A simple hidden variables model is introduced, which solves the “soft” problem even in an ideal setup. This is possible thanks to the use of vectors in real space as the hidden variables and the corresponding operation (projection), which do not hold to Boolean logic. This model reconciles the violation of Bell’s inequalities with Local Realism and should end a controversy that has lasted for decades. Regarding the “hard” problem, the introduced model is as incomplete as Quantum Mechanics is. It is claimed that solving the “hard” problem requires devising a new kind of quantum computer, which should be able to accept (non-Boolean) hidden variable values as input data and to replace the statistical Born’s rule of Quantum Mechanics with a deterministic threshold condition.
Eighty years ago Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen demonstrated that instantaneous reduction of wave function, believed to describe completely a pair of entangled physical systems, led to EPR paradox. The paradox disappears in statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) according to which a wave function describes only an ensemble of identically prepared physical systems. QM predicts strong correlations between outcomes of measurements performed on different members of EPR pairs in far-away locations. Searching for an intuitive explanation of these correlations John Bell analysed so called local realistic hidden variable models and proved that correlations consistent with these models satisfy Bell inequalities which are violated by some predictions of QM and by experimental data. Several different local models were constructed and inequalities proven. Some eminent physicists concluded that Nature is definitely nonlocal and that it is acting according to a law of nonlocal randomness. According to these law perfectly random, but strongly correlated events, can be produced at the same time in far away locations and a local and causal explanation of their occurrence cannot be given. We strongly disagree with this conclusion and we prove the contrary by analysing in detail some influential finite sample proofs of Bell and CHSH inequalities and so called Quantum Randi Challenges. We also show how one can win so called Bell's game without violating locality of Nature. Nonlocal randomness is inconsistent with local quantum field theory, with standard model in elementary particle physics and with causal laws and adaptive dynamics prevailing in the surrounding us world. The experimental violation of Bell-type inequalities does not prove the nonlocality of Nature but it only confirms a contextual character of quantum observables and gives a strong argument against counterfactual definiteness and against a point of view according to which experimental outcomes are produced in irreducible random way.
The correspondence principle suggests that quantum systems grow classical when large. Classical systems cannot violate Bell inequalities. Yet agents given substantial control can violate Bell inequalities proven for large-scale systems. We consider agents who have little control, implementing only general operations suited to macroscopic experimentalists: preparing small-scale entanglement and measuring macroscopic properties while suffering from noise. That experimentalists so restricted can violate a Bell inequality appears unlikely, in light of earlier literature. Yet we prove a Bell inequality that such an agent can violate, even if experimental errors have variances that scale as the system size. A violation implies nonclassicality, given limitations on particles' interactions. A product of singlets violates the inequality; experimental tests are feasible for photons, solid-state systems, atoms, and trapped ions. Consistently with known results, violations of our Bell inequality cannot disprove local hidden-variables theories. By rejecting the disproof goal, we show, one can certify nonclassical correlations under reasonable experimental assumptions.