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

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association

Stochastic Locality and the Bell Theorems

Geoffrey Paul Hellman

Published Jan 1, 1982• 2 citations
Publisher

Abstract

As was remarked two years ago at a symposium of the PSA on locality and hidden variables (Shimony 1981), the Bell theorems together with experiments supporting the quantum correlations (violating the inequalities of the theorems) provide a rather remarkable opportunity for philosophy. Shimony summed this up in the nice phrase, “experimental metaphysics”. For, as he pointed out, arguments based on Bell-type theorems, concluding that certain experiments should exhibit correlations obeying a certain inequality, generally employ premises of a metaphysical character, e.g., that the systems in question are deterministic (in the experimental observables). If, in fact, the experimental predictions are violated, and if one has reason to believe any other premises involved, then one must give up the metaphysical hypothesis.

DOI
10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1982.2.192446

Related papers

Quantum Solipsism and Nonlocality

Travis Norsen

J.S. Bell's remarkable 1964 theorem showed that any theory sharing the empirical predictions of orthodox quantum mechanics would have to exhibit a surprising – and, from the point of view of relativity theory, very troubling – kind of nonlocality. Unfortunately, even still on this 50th anniversary, many commentators and textbook authors continue to misrepresent Bell's theorem. In particular, one continues to hear the claim that Bell's result leaves open the option of concluding either nonlocality or the failure of some unorthodox “hidden variable” (or “determinism” or “realism”) premise. This mistaken claim is often based on a failure to appreciate the role of the earlier 1935 argument of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen in Bell's reasoning. After briefly reviewing this situation, I turn to two alternative versions of quantum theory – the “many worlds” theory of Everett and the quantum Bayesian interpretation of Fuchs, Schack, Caves, and Mermin – that purport to provide actual counterexamples to Bell's claim that nonlocality is required to account for the empirically verified quantum predictions. After analyzing each theory's grounds for claiming to explain the EPR–Bell correlations locally, however, one can see that (despite a number of fundamental differences) the two theories share a common for-all-practical-purposes (FAPP) solipsistic character. This dramatically undermines such theories’ claims to provide a local explanation of the correlations and thus, by concretizing the ridiculous philosophical lengths to which one must go to elude Bell's own conclusion, reinforces the assertion that nonlocality really is required to coherently explain the empirical data. Introduction Fifty years ago, in 1964 [1], John Stewart Bell first proved the theorem that has become widely known as “Bell's Theorem” but that Bell himself instead referred to as the “locality inequality theorem” [2]. In Bell's own view, the theorem showed that the empirical predictions of local theories will be constrained by Bell's inequality (or as Bell himself preferred to call it, the “locality inequality”). Hence, nonlocality is a necessary feature of any theory that shares the empirical predictions of standard quantum mechanics.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 31, 2016•22 citations

Quantum non-locality—it ainʼt necessarily so...

Marek Żukowski, Časlav Brukner

Bell's theorem is 50 years old. Still there is a controversy about its implications. Much of it has its roots in confusion regarding the premises from which the theorem can be derived. Some claim that a derivation of Bell's inequalities requires just locality assumption, and nothing more. Violations of the inequalities are then interpreted as ``nonlocality'' or ``quantum nonlocality''. We show that such claims are unfounded and that every derivation of Bell's inequalities requires a premise -- in addition to locality and freedom of choice -- which is either assumed tacitly, or unconsciously, or is embedded in a single compound condition (like Bell's ``local causality''). The premise is equivalent to the assumption of existence of additional variables which do not appear in the quantum formalism (in form of determinism, or joint probability for outcomes of all conceivable measurements, or ``additional causes`'', or ``hidden variables'', ``complete description of the state'' or counterfactual definiteness, etc.). A certain irony is that perhaps the main message of violation of Bell's inequalities is that our notion of locality should be based on an operationally well-defined no-signalling condition, rather than on local causality.

arXiv:1501.04618•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Oct 9, 2014•100 citations

A remark on the use of Bell inequalities

Johannes F. Geurdes

In the present paper it is demonstrated that Bell's expression for local hidden variable correlation allows one to derive the quantum correlation. This raises questions about the use of Bell inequalities in experiments. In the paper a CHSH violating example is given based solely on the locality arguments of the model.

arXiv:0912.0235•Dec 1, 2009•0 citations

Non-Locality and Quantum Theory: New Experimental Evidence

Luigi Accardi, Massimo Regoli

Starting from the late 60’s many experiments have been performed to verify the violation Bell’s inequality by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type correlations. The idea of these experiments being that: (i) Bell’s inequality is a consequence of locality, hence its experimental violation is an indication of non locality; (ii) this violation is a typical quantum phenomenon because any classical system making local choices (either deterministic or random) will produce correlations satisfying this inequality. Both statements (i) and (ii) have been criticized by quantum probability on theoretical grounds (not discussed in the present paper) and the experiment discussed below has been devised to support these theoretical arguments. We emphasize that the goal of our experiment is not to reproduce classically the EPR correlations but to prove that there exist perfectly local classical dynamical systems violating Bell’s inequality. The conclusions of the present experiment are: no contradiction between quantum theory and locality can be deduced from the violation of Bell’s inequality. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory becomes quite reasonable and not metaphyisic if interpreted at the light of the chameleon effect. One can realize quantum entanglement by classical computers. In section (7) we prove that our experiment also provides a classical analogue of the type of logical (i.e. independent of statistics) incompatibilities pointed out by Greenberger, Home and Zeilinger. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks•Feb 24, 2006•13 citations

Reality, locality and all that: "experimental metaphysics" and the quantum foundations

Eric G. Cavalcanti

In recent decades there has been a resurge of interest in the foundations of quantum theory, partly motivated by new experimental techniques, partly by the emerging field of quantum information science. Old questions, asked since the seminal article by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR), are being revisited. The work of John Bell has changed the direction of investigation by recognising that those fundamental philosophical questions can have, after all, input from experiment. Abner Shimony has aptly termed this new field of enquiry experimental metaphysics. The objective of this Thesis is to contribute to that body of research, by formalising old concepts, proposing new ones, and finding new results in well-studied areas. Without losing from sight that the appeal of experimental metaphysics comes from the adjective, every major result is followed by clear experimental proposals with detailed analysis of feasibility for quantum-atom optical setups. After setting the appropriate terminology and the basic concepts, we will start by analysing the original argument of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. We propose a general mathematical form for the assumptions behind the EPR argument, namely those of local causality and completeness. That formalisation entails what was termed a Local Hidden State model by Wiseman et al., which was proposed as a formalisation of the concept of steering first introduced by Schrodinger in a reply to the EPR paper. Violation of any consequences that can be derived from the assumption of that model therefore implies a demonstration of the EPR paradox. We will show how one can then re-derive the well-known EPR-Reid criterion for continuous-variables correlations, and derive new ones applicable to the spin setting considered by Bohm. The spin set-up of the EPR-Bohm was used by Bell to derive his now famous theorem demonstrating the incompatibility of the assumption of local causality and the predictions of quantum mechanics. The inequalities which bear his name can be derived for any number of discrete outcomes, but so far there has been no derivation which can be directly applied to the continuous-variables case of the original EPR paradox. We close the circle by deriving a class of inequalities which make no explicit mention about the number of outcomes of the experiments involved, and can therefore be used in continuous-variables measurements with no need for binning the continuous results into discrete ones. Apart from that intrinsic interest, these inequalities could prove important as a means to perform an unambiguous test of Bell inequalities since optical homodyne detection can be performed with high detection efficiency. The technique, which is based on a simple variance inequality, can alsobe used tore-derive alarge class of well-known Bell-type inequalities and at the same time find their quantum bound, making explicit from a formal point of view that the non-commutativity of the local operators is at the heart of the quantum violations. Finally, we address the issue of macroscopic superpositions originally sparked by the infamous cat paradox of Schrodinger. We consider macroscopic, mesoscopic and ‘S -scopic’ quantum superpositions of eigenstates of an observable, and develop some signatures for their existence. We define the extent, or size S of a (pure-state) su-perposition, with respect to an observable X, as being the maximum difference in the outcomes of X predicted by that superposition. Such superpositions are referred to as generalised S -scopic superpositions to distinguish them from the extreme superpo-sitions that superpose only the two states that have a difference S in their prediction for the observable. We also consider generalised S -scopic superpositions of coherent states. We explore the constraints that are placed on the statistics if we suppose a system to be described by mixtures of superpositions that are restricted in size. In this way we arrive at experimental criteria that are sufficient to deduce the existence of a generalised S -scopic superposition. The signatures developed are useful where one is able to demonstrate a degree of squeezing.

•Oct 1, 2007•2 citations

Bell's Theorem Without Hidden Variables

Henry Pierce Stapp

Experiments motivated by Bell's theorem have led some physicists to conclude that quantum theory is nonlocal. However, the theoretical basis for such claims is usually taken to be Bell's Theorem, which shows only that if certain predictions of quantum theory are correct, and a strong hidden-variable assumption is valid, then a certain locality condition must fail. This locality condition expresses the idea that what an experimenter freely chooses to measure in one spacetime region can have no effect of any kind in a second region situated spacelike relative to the first. The experimental results conform closely to the predictions of quantum theory in such cases, but the most reasonable conclusion to draw is not that locality fails, but rather that the hidden-variable assumption is false. For this assumption conflicts with the quantum precept that unperformed experiments have no outcomes. The present paper deduces the failure of this locality condition directly from the precepts of quantum theory themselves, in a way that generates no inconsistency or any conflict with the predictions of relativistic quantum field theory.

arXiv:quant-ph/0010047•Oct 11, 2000•5 citations
As was remarked two years ago at a symposium of the PSA on locality and hidden variables (Shimony 1981), the Bell theorems together with experiments supporting the quantum correlations (violating the inequalities of the theorems) provide a rather remarkable opportunity for philosophy. Shimony summed this up in the nice phrase, “experimental metaphysics”. For, as he pointed out, arguments based on Bell-type theorems, concluding that certain experiments should exhibit correlations obeying a certain inequality, generally employ premises of a metaphysical character, e.g., that the systems in question are deterministic (in the experimental observables). If, in fact, the experimental predictions are violated, and if one has reason to believe any other premises involved, then one must give up the metaphysical hypothesis.
J.S. Bell's remarkable 1964 theorem showed that any theory sharing the empirical predictions of orthodox quantum mechanics would have to exhibit a surprising – and, from the point of view of relativity theory, very troubling – kind of nonlocality. Unfortunately, even still on this 50th anniversary, many commentators and textbook authors continue to misrepresent Bell's theorem. In particular, one continues to hear the claim that Bell's result leaves open the option of concluding either nonlocality or the failure of some unorthodox “hidden variable” (or “determinism” or “realism”) premise. This mistaken claim is often based on a failure to appreciate the role of the earlier 1935 argument of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen in Bell's reasoning. After briefly reviewing this situation, I turn to two alternative versions of quantum theory – the “many worlds” theory of Everett and the quantum Bayesian interpretation of Fuchs, Schack, Caves, and Mermin – that purport to provide actual counterexamples to Bell's claim that nonlocality is required to account for the empirically verified quantum predictions. After analyzing each theory's grounds for claiming to explain the EPR–Bell correlations locally, however, one can see that (despite a number of fundamental differences) the two theories share a common for-all-practical-purposes (FAPP) solipsistic character. This dramatically undermines such theories’ claims to provide a local explanation of the correlations and thus, by concretizing the ridiculous philosophical lengths to which one must go to elude Bell's own conclusion, reinforces the assertion that nonlocality really is required to coherently explain the empirical data. Introduction Fifty years ago, in 1964 [1], John Stewart Bell first proved the theorem that has become widely known as “Bell's Theorem” but that Bell himself instead referred to as the “locality inequality theorem” [2]. In Bell's own view, the theorem showed that the empirical predictions of local theories will be constrained by Bell's inequality (or as Bell himself preferred to call it, the “locality inequality”). Hence, nonlocality is a necessary feature of any theory that shares the empirical predictions of standard quantum mechanics.
Bell's theorem is 50 years old. Still there is a controversy about its implications. Much of it has its roots in confusion regarding the premises from which the theorem can be derived. Some claim that a derivation of Bell's inequalities requires just locality assumption, and nothing more. Violations of the inequalities are then interpreted as ``nonlocality'' or ``quantum nonlocality''. We show that such claims are unfounded and that every derivation of Bell's inequalities requires a premise -- in addition to locality and freedom of choice -- which is either assumed tacitly, or unconsciously, or is embedded in a single compound condition (like Bell's ``local causality''). The premise is equivalent to the assumption of existence of additional variables which do not appear in the quantum formalism (in form of determinism, or joint probability for outcomes of all conceivable measurements, or ``additional causes`'', or ``hidden variables'', ``complete description of the state'' or counterfactual definiteness, etc.). A certain irony is that perhaps the main message of violation of Bell's inequalities is that our notion of locality should be based on an operationally well-defined no-signalling condition, rather than on local causality.
Starting from the late 60’s many experiments have been performed to verify the violation Bell’s inequality by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type correlations. The idea of these experiments being that: (i) Bell’s inequality is a consequence of locality, hence its experimental violation is an indication of non locality; (ii) this violation is a typical quantum phenomenon because any classical system making local choices (either deterministic or random) will produce correlations satisfying this inequality. Both statements (i) and (ii) have been criticized by quantum probability on theoretical grounds (not discussed in the present paper) and the experiment discussed below has been devised to support these theoretical arguments. We emphasize that the goal of our experiment is not to reproduce classically the EPR correlations but to prove that there exist perfectly local classical dynamical systems violating Bell’s inequality. The conclusions of the present experiment are: no contradiction between quantum theory and locality can be deduced from the violation of Bell’s inequality. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory becomes quite reasonable and not metaphyisic if interpreted at the light of the chameleon effect. One can realize quantum entanglement by classical computers. In section (7) we prove that our experiment also provides a classical analogue of the type of logical (i.e. independent of statistics) incompatibilities pointed out by Greenberger, Home and Zeilinger. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
In recent decades there has been a resurge of interest in the foundations of quantum theory, partly motivated by new experimental techniques, partly by the emerging field of quantum information science. Old questions, asked since the seminal article by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR), are being revisited. The work of John Bell has changed the direction of investigation by recognising that those fundamental philosophical questions can have, after all, input from experiment. Abner Shimony has aptly termed this new field of enquiry experimental metaphysics. The objective of this Thesis is to contribute to that body of research, by formalising old concepts, proposing new ones, and finding new results in well-studied areas. Without losing from sight that the appeal of experimental metaphysics comes from the adjective, every major result is followed by clear experimental proposals with detailed analysis of feasibility for quantum-atom optical setups. After setting the appropriate terminology and the basic concepts, we will start by analysing the original argument of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. We propose a general mathematical form for the assumptions behind the EPR argument, namely those of local causality and completeness. That formalisation entails what was termed a Local Hidden State model by Wiseman et al., which was proposed as a formalisation of the concept of steering first introduced by Schrodinger in a reply to the EPR paper. Violation of any consequences that can be derived from the assumption of that model therefore implies a demonstration of the EPR paradox. We will show how one can then re-derive the well-known EPR-Reid criterion for continuous-variables correlations, and derive new ones applicable to the spin setting considered by Bohm. The spin set-up of the EPR-Bohm was used by Bell to derive his now famous theorem demonstrating the incompatibility of the assumption of local causality and the predictions of quantum mechanics. The inequalities which bear his name can be derived for any number of discrete outcomes, but so far there has been no derivation which can be directly applied to the continuous-variables case of the original EPR paradox. We close the circle by deriving a class of inequalities which make no explicit mention about the number of outcomes of the experiments involved, and can therefore be used in continuous-variables measurements with no need for binning the continuous results into discrete ones. Apart from that intrinsic interest, these inequalities could prove important as a means to perform an unambiguous test of Bell inequalities since optical homodyne detection can be performed with high detection efficiency. The technique, which is based on a simple variance inequality, can alsobe used tore-derive alarge class of well-known Bell-type inequalities and at the same time find their quantum bound, making explicit from a formal point of view that the non-commutativity of the local operators is at the heart of the quantum violations. Finally, we address the issue of macroscopic superpositions originally sparked by the infamous cat paradox of Schrodinger. We consider macroscopic, mesoscopic and ‘S -scopic’ quantum superpositions of eigenstates of an observable, and develop some signatures for their existence. We define the extent, or size S of a (pure-state) su-perposition, with respect to an observable X, as being the maximum difference in the outcomes of X predicted by that superposition. Such superpositions are referred to as generalised S -scopic superpositions to distinguish them from the extreme superpo-sitions that superpose only the two states that have a difference S in their prediction for the observable. We also consider generalised S -scopic superpositions of coherent states. We explore the constraints that are placed on the statistics if we suppose a system to be described by mixtures of superpositions that are restricted in size. In this way we arrive at experimental criteria that are sufficient to deduce the existence of a generalised S -scopic superposition. The signatures developed are useful where one is able to demonstrate a degree of squeezing.
Experiments motivated by Bell's theorem have led some physicists to conclude that quantum theory is nonlocal. However, the theoretical basis for such claims is usually taken to be Bell's Theorem, which shows only that if certain predictions of quantum theory are correct, and a strong hidden-variable assumption is valid, then a certain locality condition must fail. This locality condition expresses the idea that what an experimenter freely chooses to measure in one spacetime region can have no effect of any kind in a second region situated spacelike relative to the first. The experimental results conform closely to the predictions of quantum theory in such cases, but the most reasonable conclusion to draw is not that locality fails, but rather that the hidden-variable assumption is false. For this assumption conflicts with the quantum precept that unperformed experiments have no outcomes. The present paper deduces the failure of this locality condition directly from the precepts of quantum theory themselves, in a way that generates no inconsistency or any conflict with the predictions of relativistic quantum field theory.