An Exposition of Bell’s Theorem

Abner Shimony

The purpose of this lecture is to give a self-contained demonstration of a version of Bell's theorem and a discussion of the significance of the theorem and the experiments which it inspired. The lecture should be comprehensible to people who have had no previous acquaintance with the literature on Bell's theorem, but I hope that explicitness about premisses and consequences will make it useful even to those who are familiar with the literature. All versions of Bell's theorem are variations, and usually generalizations, of the pioneering paper of J. S. Bell of 1964, entitled “On the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Paradox.” All of them consider an ensemble of pairs of particles prepared in a uniform manner, so that statistical correlations may be expected between outcomes of tests performed on the particles of each pair. If each pair in the ensemble is characterized by the same quantum state φ, then the quantum mechanical predictions for correlations of the outcomes can in principle be calculated when the tests are specified. On the other hand, if it is assumed that the statistical behavior of the pairs is governed by a theory which satisfies certain independence conditions (always similar to the Parameter and Outcome Independence conditions stated below, though the exact details vary from version to version of Bell's theorem), then it is possible to derive a restriction upon the statistical correlations of the outcomes of tests upon the two particles.

Kaj Börge Hansen, Filosofiska föreningen

Justo Pastor Lambare

The alleged nonlocal character of quantum mechanics is inextricably related to the formulation of the Bell theorem. However, as we shall see, that relation is commonly incorrectly assessed. The departure from the clear line of reasoning that John Bell tried to convey has led to a polarization of part of the scientific community into radical irreconcilable positions. We show how the correct appreciation of Bell's work calls for reinterpreting the usual significance given to the Bell theorem yielding a more rational perspective of the problem. Given the present relevance of the Bell-type inequalities in quantum information technology and quantum foundations, further clarification of their relation to the nonlocality conundrum deserves due attention. The exposition is also of didactic value. It shows the problems arising from incorrect inferences and superfluous metaphysical ideas.

Richard D Gill, Inge S. Helland, Bart Jongejan

Bell's theorem states that no description of a Bell experiment can be simultaneously local, realistic in the sense of counterfactual definiteness, and free of conspiracy between settings and hidden state. The recent generation of experiments has confirmed the predicted violation of the CHSH inequality, so one of the assumptions must be abandoned. Which one, and how one reconstructs a coherent worldview after doing so, is a question on which many authors disagree. This paper is written by three such authors. All three reject both counterfactual definiteness and conspiratorial violation of statistical independence of setting choices and state. After a joint exposition of the classical half of Bell's theorem in the language of Pearl-style causal graphs, a joint summary of the loophole-free experiments, and a joint survey of the recent literature, each author states where they have presently arrived. Gill accepts irreducible and non-local quantum randomness and finds the choice between locality and realism a false dichotomy. In his later works, Bell derives counterfactual definiteness from classical local causality, and that is what has to go. The metaphysical concepts "realism", "locality", "causality" need to be reconsidered. Helland reconstructs the Hilbert-space formalism from a theory of accessible variables, and from this theory he concludes that every observer must be limited in a specific sense. Jongejan proposes a geometric hidden-variable construction in which the degree of violation of the CHSH inequality depends on the number of dimensions of space, Tsirelson's bound corresponding to three dimensions. The authors conclude with a discussion.

Justo Pastor Lambare

The alleged nonlocal character of quantum mechanics is inextricably related to the formulation of the Bell theorem. However, as we shall see, that relation is commonly incorrectly assessed. The departure from the clear line of reasoning that John Bell tried to convey has led to a polarization of part of the scientific community into radical irreconcilable positions. We show how the correct appreciation of Bell's work calls for reinterpreting the usual significance given to the Bell theorem yielding a more rational perspective of the problem. Given the relevance of the Bell-type inequalities in quantum information technology and quantum foundations, further clarification of their relation to the nonlocality conundrum deserves due attention. The exposition is also of didactic value. It shows the problems arising from incorrect inferences and superfluous metaphysical ideas.