Comments on the “Uncontrollable” Character of Non-Locality

Abner Shimony

Lawrence J. Landau

Abner Shimony

Acknowledgements Part I. Measurment in Quantum Theory: 1. Role of the observer in quantum theory 2. Approximate measurement in quantum mechanics with Mary H. Fehrs 3. Proposed neutron interferometer test of some non-linear variants of wave mechanics 4. Desiderata for modified quantum mechanics 5. Filters with infinitely many components 6. Proposed neutron interferometer observation of the sign change of a spinor due to 2? precession with Michael A. Horne Part II. Quantum Entaglement and Nonlocality: 7. Experimental consequences of local hidden-variable theories 8. An exposition of Bell's theorem 9. Contextual hidden variables theories and Bell's inequalities 10. Controllable and uncontrollable nonlocality 11. Events and processes in the quantum world 12. An exchange on local beables: comment on Bell's theory with Michael A. Horne and John F. Clauser 13. Physical and philosophical issues of the Bohr-Einstein debate Part III. Complex Systems: 14. The methodology of synthesis: parts and wholes in low energy physics 15. Some proposals concerning parts and wholes 16. The non-existence of a principle of natural selection: reply to Sober Part IV. Time: 17. Towards a revision of the protophysics of time 18. The transient now Part V. The Mental and the Physical: 19. Quantum physics and the philosophy of Whitehead 20. Reflections on the philosophy of Bohr, Heisenberg and Schroedinger 21. Wave-packet reduction as a medium of communication with Joseph Hall, Christopher Kim, and Brian MecElroy Index.

Abner Shimony, Howard Stein

A 1997 paper by Henry Stapp attempts to achieve a definitive argument for his long-sustained thesis that quantum mechanics implies a nonlocality inconsistent with the locality of relativity theory. His argument assumes both the validity of counterfactual reasoning under certain circumstances and the free choice of performance of experiments, and it specifically refrains from any assumptions about “elements of physical reality” as understood by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. In Sec. I we drastically condense his argument but retain his central principle of inference, called “LOC2,” which he claims is a consequence of relativistic locality. By careful attention to counterfactual reasoning we then throw doubt upon this claim and hence upon his argument as a whole. In Sec. II we answer Stapp’s reply to our critique of the 1997 paper. Section III is a postscript, commenting briefly on Stapp’s answer to Sec. II.

Marco Barbieri, F. De Martini, G. Di Nepi +1 more