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

Europhysics Letters (EPL)

Inclusion of time in the theorem of Bell

N. David Mermin

Published Jan 1, 2003• 3 citations
Publisher

Abstract

I explain in elementary terms why time-dependent effects, including time-correlated hidden variables at the detectors, do not invalidate a simple version of Bell's theorem involving two detectors with 3-pole switches and red and green lights.
DOI
10.1209/epl/i2003-00199-0

Related papers

Shedding (red and green) light on "time related hidden parameters"

N. David Mermin

I explain in elementary terms why the critique of Hess and Philipp in Section 3.2 of quant-ph/0103028 fails to invalidate the nontechnical version of Bell's theorem I gave twenty years ago, involving two detectors with 3-pole switches and red and green lights.

arXiv:quant-ph/0206118•Jun 18, 2002•4 citations

Bell's theorem in the presence of classical communication

N. David Mermin

I explain what kinds of correlation or even direct classical communication between detectors invalidate Bell's theorem, and what kinds do not.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207140•Jul 24, 2002•2 citations

Hidden variables and the two theorems of John Bell

N. David Mermin

Although skeptical of the prohibitive power of no-hidden-variables theorems, John Bell was himself responsible for the two most important ones. I describe some recent versions of the lesser known of the two (familiar to experts as the "Kochen-Specker theorem") which have transparently simple proofs. One of the new versions can be converted without additional analysis into a powerful form of the very much better known "Bell's Theorem," thereby clarifying the conceptual link between these two results of Bell.

arXiv:1802.10119•Reviews of Modern Physics•Jul 1, 1993•1,076 citations

Bell’s theorem with the inclusion of losses

Aleksandr V. Belinsky

It is demonstrated that the local theory of hidden parameters can be disproved without recourse to high-efficiency detectors.

Optics and Spectroscopy•Jun 8, 2004•7 citations

Comment on Mermin's Recent Proof of the Theorem of Bell

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

Mermin states in a recent paper that his nontechnical version of Bell's theorem stands and is not invalidated by time and setting dependent instrument parameters as claimed in one of our previous papers. We identify a number of misinterpretations (of our definitions) and mathematical inconsistencies in Mermin's paper and show that Mermin's conclusions are therefore not valid: his proof does not go forward if certain possible time dependencies are taken into account.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207110•Jul 18, 2002•0 citations

Bell's Theorem: A Critique

M. R. Clover

By implicitly assuming that all possible Bell-measurements occur simultaneously, all proofs of Bell's Theorem violate Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This assumption is made in the original form of Bell's inequality, in Wigner's probability inequalities, and in the ``nonlocality without inequalities'' arguments. The introduction of time into derivations of these variants of Bell's theorem results in extra terms related to the time order of the measurements used in constructing correlation coefficients. Since the same locality assumptions are made in the Heisenberg-compliant derivations of this paper, only time-independent classical local hidden variable theories are forbidden by violations of the original Bell inequalities; time-dependent quantum local hidden variable theories can satisfy this new bound and agree with experiment. We further point out that factorizable wavefunctions have been used to describe some EPR experiments and can be used to describe others. These will generate local de Broglie-Bohm trajectories in the description of the data. This second, independent, line of argument also shows that violation of Bell's inequality is only evidence that Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle cannot be ignored.

arXiv:quant-ph/0502016•Feb 1, 2005•9 citations
Although skeptical of the prohibitive power of no-hidden-variables theorems, John Bell was himself responsible for the two most important ones. I describe some recent versions of the lesser known of the two (familiar to experts as the "Kochen-Specker theorem") which have transparently simple proofs. One of the new versions can be converted without additional analysis into a powerful form of the very much better known "Bell's Theorem," thereby clarifying the conceptual link between these two results of Bell.
By implicitly assuming that all possible Bell-measurements occur simultaneously, all proofs of Bell's Theorem violate Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This assumption is made in the original form of Bell's inequality, in Wigner's probability inequalities, and in the ``nonlocality without inequalities'' arguments. The introduction of time into derivations of these variants of Bell's theorem results in extra terms related to the time order of the measurements used in constructing correlation coefficients. Since the same locality assumptions are made in the Heisenberg-compliant derivations of this paper, only time-independent classical local hidden variable theories are forbidden by violations of the original Bell inequalities; time-dependent quantum local hidden variable theories can satisfy this new bound and agree with experiment. We further point out that factorizable wavefunctions have been used to describe some EPR experiments and can be used to describe others. These will generate local de Broglie-Bohm trajectories in the description of the data. This second, independent, line of argument also shows that violation of Bell's inequality is only evidence that Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle cannot be ignored.