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

Open Physics

Special Issue: Ever New "Loopholes" in Bell’s Argument and Experimental Tests

K. Hess, Hans A. De Raedt, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Published Sep 1, 2017• 7 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1515/phys-2017-0067

Related papers

Experimental implications of Bell's theorem

M. Ardehali

Physics Letters A•May 1, 1993•3 citations

Nonlocality via Entanglement-Swapping -- a Bridge Too Far?

Huw Price, K. B. Wharton

A 2015 experiment by Hanson and Delft colleagues provided new confirmation that the quantum world violates the Bell inequalities, being the first Bell test to close two known experimental loopholes simultaneously. The experiment was also taken to provide new evidence of quantum nonlocality. Here we argue for caution about the latter claim. The Delft experiment relies on entanglement swapping, and our main claim is that this geometry introduces new loopholes in the argument from violation of the Bell inequalities to nonlocality. In the absence of retrocausality, the sensitivity of such experiments to these new loopholes depends on the temporal relation between the entanglement swapping measurement C and the two measurements A and B between which we seek to infer nonlocality. The loopholes loom large if the C is in the future of A and B, but not if C is in the past. The Delft experiment itself is the intermediate case, in which the separation is spacelike. We argue that this leaves it vulnerable to the new loopholes, unable to establish conclusively that it avoids them. We also discuss the implications of permitting retrocausality for the issue of causal influence across entanglement swapping measurements.

•Jan 13, 2021•0 citations

HAS CHSH-INEQUALITY ANY RELATION TO EPR-ARGUMENT?

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

We emphasize the role of the precise correlations loophole in attempting to connect the CHSH type inequalities with the EPR-argument. The possibility to test theories with hidden variables experimentally by using such inequalities is questioned. The role of the original Bell inequality is highlighted. The interpretation of the CHSH inequality in the spirit of Bohr, as a new test of incompatibility, is presented. The positions of Bohr, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, Bell, Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt, De Broglie, Hertz, and Boltzmann on interrelation of theory and experiment are enlightened.

arXiv:1808.03762•May 26, 2020•3 citations

The Idealistic Implications of Bell’s Theorem

Theodore W. Schick

Idealistic Studies•Jan 1, 1989•1 citation

Quantum theory is incompatible with relativity: A new proof beyond Bell's theorem and a test of unitary quantum theories

Shan Gao

It has been debated whether quantum mechanics and special relativity are incompatible and whether there is a preferred Lorentz frame if they are incompatible. Bell's theorem is an important cornerstone, but it does not give us a definite positive answer due to the existence of supplementary assumptions or theoretical loopholes; there are unitary quantum theories which evade Bell's theorem and claim that they are compatible with special relativity. In this paper, I address the important issue of whether unitary quantum theories are compatible with special relativity. I propose a new Gedankenexperiment, a variant of the EPR-Bohm experiment with a superobserver who can undo a measurement. In this experiment, there is a stronger correlation (between the results of two spacelike separated measurements) than the correlation investigated in Bell's theorem. Based on an analysis of the correlations in different Lorentz frames, I prove that unitary single-world theories are incompatible with special relativity, and in order to avoid the incompatibility, there must exist a preferred Lorentz frame in these theories. Moreover, I argue that the incompatibility proof also applies to a proper version of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This closes the major theoretical loopholes of Bell's theorem, including relationalism, retrocausality, and superdeterminism. Finally, I argue that the stronger correlation found in the Gedankenexperiment cannot be explained by retrocausal processes or even the common causes in the past, but only be explained by nonlocal processes or actions at a distance. This provides a test of unitary quantum theories, as well as a further support for the new incompatibility proof beyond Bell's theorem.

•Jun 27, 2019•5 citations

Bell’s Theorem: The Forgotten Loophole and How to Exploit It

Paul J. Werbos

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1989•9 citations
A 2015 experiment by Hanson and Delft colleagues provided new confirmation that the quantum world violates the Bell inequalities, being the first Bell test to close two known experimental loopholes simultaneously. The experiment was also taken to provide new evidence of quantum nonlocality. Here we argue for caution about the latter claim. The Delft experiment relies on entanglement swapping, and our main claim is that this geometry introduces new loopholes in the argument from violation of the Bell inequalities to nonlocality. In the absence of retrocausality, the sensitivity of such experiments to these new loopholes depends on the temporal relation between the entanglement swapping measurement C and the two measurements A and B between which we seek to infer nonlocality. The loopholes loom large if the C is in the future of A and B, but not if C is in the past. The Delft experiment itself is the intermediate case, in which the separation is spacelike. We argue that this leaves it vulnerable to the new loopholes, unable to establish conclusively that it avoids them. We also discuss the implications of permitting retrocausality for the issue of causal influence across entanglement swapping measurements.
We emphasize the role of the precise correlations loophole in attempting to connect the CHSH type inequalities with the EPR-argument. The possibility to test theories with hidden variables experimentally by using such inequalities is questioned. The role of the original Bell inequality is highlighted. The interpretation of the CHSH inequality in the spirit of Bohr, as a new test of incompatibility, is presented. The positions of Bohr, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, Bell, Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt, De Broglie, Hertz, and Boltzmann on interrelation of theory and experiment are enlightened.
It has been debated whether quantum mechanics and special relativity are incompatible and whether there is a preferred Lorentz frame if they are incompatible. Bell's theorem is an important cornerstone, but it does not give us a definite positive answer due to the existence of supplementary assumptions or theoretical loopholes; there are unitary quantum theories which evade Bell's theorem and claim that they are compatible with special relativity. In this paper, I address the important issue of whether unitary quantum theories are compatible with special relativity. I propose a new Gedankenexperiment, a variant of the EPR-Bohm experiment with a superobserver who can undo a measurement. In this experiment, there is a stronger correlation (between the results of two spacelike separated measurements) than the correlation investigated in Bell's theorem. Based on an analysis of the correlations in different Lorentz frames, I prove that unitary single-world theories are incompatible with special relativity, and in order to avoid the incompatibility, there must exist a preferred Lorentz frame in these theories. Moreover, I argue that the incompatibility proof also applies to a proper version of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This closes the major theoretical loopholes of Bell's theorem, including relationalism, retrocausality, and superdeterminism. Finally, I argue that the stronger correlation found in the Gedankenexperiment cannot be explained by retrocausal processes or even the common causes in the past, but only be explained by nonlocal processes or actions at a distance. This provides a test of unitary quantum theories, as well as a further support for the new incompatibility proof beyond Bell's theorem.