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

Physics Essays

The emperor has no nonlocality

Lukas A. Saul

Published Dec 19, 2015• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment and certain predictions of quantum mechanics in theoretical and experimental forms are sometimes described as exhibiting non-local action. We describe here an interpretation of one oft-discussed EPR experiment with a locally realistic model. We demonstrate a consistent description based on probabilistic measurement for Mermin and Aspect EPR setups, and show how Bell's theorem applies. Quantum non-locality is shown to be an interpretation dependent on deterministic measurement and vanishes when a treatment of probabilistic measurement and relevant information theory is included.

DOI
10.4006/0836-1398-28.4.561

Related papers

The emperor has no non-locality

Dr. Lukas, A. Saul, Oxford England

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment and the relevant predictions of quantum mechanics in theoretical and experimental forms are reinterpreted here with a locally realistic model. We demonstrate a consistent description based on probabilistic measurement for Mermin and Aspect EPR setups, and show how Bell's theorem applies. Quantum non-locality is shown to be an interpretation dependent on deterministic measurement and vanishes when a treatment of probabilistic measurement and relevant information theory is included. 1) Probabilistic Measurement This term attempts to capture the essence of what is evident from experimental measurements: the outcome of a single external measurement of some physical system is not completely determined by internal variables of the object being measured. Rather, the outcome of a measurement of a system is determined by the physical interaction of internal variables in that system with external variables of the measurement device. This is evident in the language and practical use of measurements. We are used to hearing measurements reported with error bars and standard deviations implying that measurements have at some level a probabilistic nature. When error bars are not given they are often assumed to exist at the

•Jan 1, 2015•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.

arXiv:quant-ph/0007019•Jul 7, 2000•4 citations

A Modest View of Bell's Theorem

S. P. Boughn

In the 80 years since the seminal Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) paper, physicists and philosophers have mused about the `spooky action at a distance' aspect of quantum mechanics that so bothered Einstein. In his formal analysis of EPR-type entangled quantum states, Bell (1964) concluded that any hidden variable theory designed to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics must necessarily be nonlocal and allow superluminal interactions. This doesn't immediately imply that nonlocality is a characteristic feature of quantum mechanics let alone a fundamental property of nature; however, many physicists and philosophers of science do harbor this belief. Experts in the field often use the term `nonlocality' to designate particular non-classical aspects of quantum entanglement and do not confuse the term with superluminal interactions. However, many physicists seem to take the term more literally. I endeavor to disabuse the latter of this notion by emphasizing that the correlations of Bell-type entanglement are a result of ordinary quantum superposition with no need to introduce nonlocality. The conclusion of the EPR paper wasn't that quantum mechanics is nonlocal but rather that it is an incomplete description of reality. For different reasons, many physicists, including me, agree with Einstein that quantum mechanics is necessarily an incomplete description of reality.

arXiv:1604.08529•Apr 28, 2016•3 citations

EPR Paradox and Magician's Props

Liangsuo Shu, Shiping Jin, Xiaokang Liu +5 more

Local realism has been knocked down by the experiments with entangled pairs of particles based on Bell's theorem(J. S. Bell, Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1, 195 (1964)). However, there has been continuing debate on whether locality or realism is the problem. In this work, we analyzed the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment of Bohm's version using information theory and thermodynamics. The inference of non-locality from EPR experiments will be against the principle of non-realism of quantum mechanics. Therefore, the experiments about quantum entanglement cannot provide any proof to accuse locality.

arXiv:1407.6087•Jul 23, 2014•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

Neglecting non-locality: the response to EPR

Kristian Camilleri

Abstract The 1935 Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paper, “Can Quantum–Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?”, stands as a landmark in the foundational debates over quantum mechanics. While the paper has since become one of Einstein’s most cited works, it initially received little attention, and the feature of non-locality, which was central to the argument in the paper, was largely neglected for decades. In this paper, I offer two reasons for this early neglect of non-locality in the immediate aftermath of EPR. First, early responses to the EPR paper defended the completeness of quantum mechanics by reformulating the thought experiment the authors had presented, thereby obscuring the feature of quantum mechanics the authors had wished to highlight. Bohr’s influential reply, for instance, substituted the specific thought experiment presented by EPR with the two-slit experiment, thus suppressing the entanglement between spatially separated systems. A second reason for the marginalization of non-locality was the tendency to see Einstein’s critique of quantum mechanics as proceeding from a commitment to determinism, though this in fact played no role in the EPR paper or in his later writings and correspondence. This paper argues that the failure to recognize non-locality was partly a result of the rhetorical manoeuvring by EPR’s critics, but also to a broader philosophical climate dominated by concerns over determinism, which effectively eclipsed all other conceptual issues, Only with Bell’s theorem in the 1960s did non-locality return as a serious focus of foundational inquiry.

The European Physical Journal H•Aug 12, 2026•0 citations
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment and certain predictions of quantum mechanics in theoretical and experimental forms are sometimes described as exhibiting non-local action. We describe here an interpretation of one oft-discussed EPR experiment with a locally realistic model. We demonstrate a consistent description based on probabilistic measurement for Mermin and Aspect EPR setups, and show how Bell's theorem applies. Quantum non-locality is shown to be an interpretation dependent on deterministic measurement and vanishes when a treatment of probabilistic measurement and relevant information theory is included.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment and the relevant predictions of quantum mechanics in theoretical and experimental forms are reinterpreted here with a locally realistic model. We demonstrate a consistent description based on probabilistic measurement for Mermin and Aspect EPR setups, and show how Bell's theorem applies. Quantum non-locality is shown to be an interpretation dependent on deterministic measurement and vanishes when a treatment of probabilistic measurement and relevant information theory is included. 1) Probabilistic Measurement This term attempts to capture the essence of what is evident from experimental measurements: the outcome of a single external measurement of some physical system is not completely determined by internal variables of the object being measured. Rather, the outcome of a measurement of a system is determined by the physical interaction of internal variables in that system with external variables of the measurement device. This is evident in the language and practical use of measurements. We are used to hearing measurements reported with error bars and standard deviations implying that measurements have at some level a probabilistic nature. When error bars are not given they are often assumed to exist at the
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.
In the 80 years since the seminal Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) paper, physicists and philosophers have mused about the `spooky action at a distance' aspect of quantum mechanics that so bothered Einstein. In his formal analysis of EPR-type entangled quantum states, Bell (1964) concluded that any hidden variable theory designed to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics must necessarily be nonlocal and allow superluminal interactions. This doesn't immediately imply that nonlocality is a characteristic feature of quantum mechanics let alone a fundamental property of nature; however, many physicists and philosophers of science do harbor this belief. Experts in the field often use the term `nonlocality' to designate particular non-classical aspects of quantum entanglement and do not confuse the term with superluminal interactions. However, many physicists seem to take the term more literally. I endeavor to disabuse the latter of this notion by emphasizing that the correlations of Bell-type entanglement are a result of ordinary quantum superposition with no need to introduce nonlocality. The conclusion of the EPR paper wasn't that quantum mechanics is nonlocal but rather that it is an incomplete description of reality. For different reasons, many physicists, including me, agree with Einstein that quantum mechanics is necessarily an incomplete description of reality.
Local realism has been knocked down by the experiments with entangled pairs of particles based on Bell's theorem(J. S. Bell, Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1, 195 (1964)). However, there has been continuing debate on whether locality or realism is the problem. In this work, we analyzed the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment of Bohm's version using information theory and thermodynamics. The inference of non-locality from EPR experiments will be against the principle of non-realism of quantum mechanics. Therefore, the experiments about quantum entanglement cannot provide any proof to accuse locality.
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.
Abstract The 1935 Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paper, “Can Quantum–Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?”, stands as a landmark in the foundational debates over quantum mechanics. While the paper has since become one of Einstein’s most cited works, it initially received little attention, and the feature of non-locality, which was central to the argument in the paper, was largely neglected for decades. In this paper, I offer two reasons for this early neglect of non-locality in the immediate aftermath of EPR. First, early responses to the EPR paper defended the completeness of quantum mechanics by reformulating the thought experiment the authors had presented, thereby obscuring the feature of quantum mechanics the authors had wished to highlight. Bohr’s influential reply, for instance, substituted the specific thought experiment presented by EPR with the two-slit experiment, thus suppressing the entanglement between spatially separated systems. A second reason for the marginalization of non-locality was the tendency to see Einstein’s critique of quantum mechanics as proceeding from a commitment to determinism, though this in fact played no role in the EPR paper or in his later writings and correspondence. This paper argues that the failure to recognize non-locality was partly a result of the rhetorical manoeuvring by EPR’s critics, but also to a broader philosophical climate dominated by concerns over determinism, which effectively eclipsed all other conceptual issues, Only with Bell’s theorem in the 1960s did non-locality return as a serious focus of foundational inquiry.