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

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics

Can we escape from Bell's conclusion that quantum mechanics describes a non-local reality?

Willem M. de Muynck

Published Sep 1, 1996• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/s1355-2198(96)00010-x

Related papers

Quantum Mechanics and Reality are Really Local

M. R. Clover

We attempt to pull together various lines of research whose ultimate conclusion points to the actual ``locality'' of Quantum Mechanics (QM). We note that just as John Bell discovered various errors in previous ``proofs'' of the completeness of QM, he made an error of his own in deriving the ``non-locality'' of QM. We show that QM satisfies the correct locality bound for non-commuting variables -- and is therefore local for 2 or more particles. We further show that the entangled wavefunctions that produce non-local de-Broglie-Bohm guidance equations are an artifact of First Quantization, and that the wavefunctions describing such experiments do factorize in Second Quantization (QED).

arXiv:quant-ph/0312198•Dec 25, 2003•2 citations

Is Quantum Mechanics Non-Local?

William George Unruh

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2002•18 citations

Spin: Newton, Maxwell, Einstein, Dirac, Bell

Edwin Eugene Klingman

In Quantum Spin and Local Reality (QSLR) I show that Bell suppressed key physical phenomena to arrive at his inequality. As a result Bell's conclusions are incorrect — his model fails to match reality. Bell's defense is based on quantum mechanical eigenvalue equations with reference to Dirac. I briefly review some issues in the history of spin, and analyze the non-relativistic Stern-Gerlach eigenvalue equation and the relativistic Dirac equation, and show their relevance to Bell.

•Nov 1, 2014•0 citations

Can We Consider Quantum Mechanics to Be a Description of Reality?

Hervé Zwirn C

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2008•2 citations

Is a Deterministic and Local Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Possible?… First Steps

Eduardo Nahmad-Achar, Natalia Sánchez-Kuntz

Abstract Quantum states in superposition cannot be observed, suggesting that they merely embody information on possible measurement results. Yet, we think of them as describing physical systems that evolve in time according to given mathematical equations. Furthermore, evolution takes place in physical space-time, and local causality is imposed on space-time by Special Relativity (a sequence of cause and effect that constitutes a fundamental principle by which we think about and do scientific work). It is therefore strange that there is non–locality and violation of causality embedded in Quantum Mechanics. We try to give here a first step to see whether a deterministic and local interpretation is possible. We will show that Bell’s inequality is not conclusive about the non–local nature of Quantum Mechanics, in that there exists an interpretation of reality (which we put forward) which is local and in which Bell’s inequality cannot be derived. Assuming determinism and locality a new Bell-like inequality is derived, which is always satisfied by Quantum Mechanics and which allows for local hidden variables [1].

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Apr 1, 2020•0 citations

Reconciling local realism and quantum physics: A critique to Bell

Claudio Garola

Theoretical and Mathematical Physics•May 1, 1994•7 citations
We attempt to pull together various lines of research whose ultimate conclusion points to the actual ``locality'' of Quantum Mechanics (QM). We note that just as John Bell discovered various errors in previous ``proofs'' of the completeness of QM, he made an error of his own in deriving the ``non-locality'' of QM. We show that QM satisfies the correct locality bound for non-commuting variables -- and is therefore local for 2 or more particles. We further show that the entangled wavefunctions that produce non-local de-Broglie-Bohm guidance equations are an artifact of First Quantization, and that the wavefunctions describing such experiments do factorize in Second Quantization (QED).
Abstract Quantum states in superposition cannot be observed, suggesting that they merely embody information on possible measurement results. Yet, we think of them as describing physical systems that evolve in time according to given mathematical equations. Furthermore, evolution takes place in physical space-time, and local causality is imposed on space-time by Special Relativity (a sequence of cause and effect that constitutes a fundamental principle by which we think about and do scientific work). It is therefore strange that there is non–locality and violation of causality embedded in Quantum Mechanics. We try to give here a first step to see whether a deterministic and local interpretation is possible. We will show that Bell’s inequality is not conclusive about the non–local nature of Quantum Mechanics, in that there exists an interpretation of reality (which we put forward) which is local and in which Bell’s inequality cannot be derived. Assuming determinism and locality a new Bell-like inequality is derived, which is always satisfied by Quantum Mechanics and which allows for local hidden variables [1].