We propose that the universe is nonlocal and that the appropriate worldview or paradigm for this understanding is nonlocal realism. Currently the worldview of local realism guides and frames the understanding and interpretations of science. Local realism was the worldview employed by Einstein in his relativity theories, but the principles of this paradigm have operated as the guiding framework for the rest of classic science for more than a century. This paper points to incoherencies in local realism and to the violation of its principles by recent experiments; it suggests that these negative effects have undermined the credibility and legitimacy of this worldview. We offer a more inclusive worldview for the future of science called nonlocal realism. Unlike local realism, the worldview of nonlocal realism encompasses meaning, mind and universal consciousness.
We propose that the universe is nonlocal and that the appropriate worldview or paradigm for this understanding is nonlocal realism. Currently the worldview of local realism guides and frames the understanding and interpretations of science. Local realism was the worldview employed by Einstein in his relativity theories, but the principles of this paradigm have operated as the guiding framework for the rest of classic science for more than a century. This paper points to incoherencies in local realism and to the violation of its principles by recent experiments; it suggests that these negative effects have undermined the credibility and legitimacy of this worldview. We offer a more inclusive worldview for the future of science called nonlocal realism. Unlike local realism, the worldview of nonlocal realism encompasses meaning, mind and universal consciousness.
The article examines the controversial relation of scientific realism with quantum mechanics. To this end, two distinct discussions are invoked: the discussion about ‘realism’ in the context of quantum mechanics and the discussion about ‘scientific realism’ in the context of the general philosophy of science. The aim is to distinguish them in order, first, to argue that the former—revolving around ‘local realism’ and the theorems of Bell and Kochen–Specker—unjustifiably identifies realism with features of a particular worldview, and thereby fosters the impression that the failure of ‘local realism’ in quantum experiments constitutes a failure of scientific realism too; and, second, in light of the latter discussion, to claim that scientific realism and quantum mechanics can be compatible—there is ground for dealing with quantum measurement simply as a physical mind-independent interaction. Therefore, a realist approach to the theory is possible despite its notorious measurement problem, even if the issue of its interpretation is still disputed.
I s it possible to bring experiments to bear on metaphysical theses such as realism? In recent developments in quantum mechanics particularly associated with the late John Bell it has been claimed that a certain type of realism, what is known as local realism, has indeed been refuted by a series of experiments, culminating in those carried out by Alain Aspect and his collaborators in Paris in 1982. Crudely local realism means in this context that atomic and subatomic entities, the subject matter of quantum mechanics, possess definite sharp values for all their attributes at all times, and, in addition, these attributes cannot be affected instantaneously by operations such as measurements performed on other microentities at different spatial locations from the one whose attributes are in question. In other words, realism is supplemented with a denial of the possibility of instantaneous action-at-a-distance. Now relativity theory, the other great pillar of modern theoretical physics, is standardly understood as committed to such a denial. So an experimental refutation of local realism would force us to give up either locality (the no-instantaneous-action-at-a-distance principle) or the realist thesis itself. The first horn of this dilemma is closed off by appeal to relativity theory, and so the conclusion of the argument would appear to be the refutation of realism.
It is currently widely accepted, as a result of Bell's theorem and related experiments, that quantum mechanics is inconsistent with local realism and there is the so called quantum non-locality. We show that such a claim can be justified only in a simplified approach to quantum mechanics when one neglects the fundamental fact that there exist space and time. Mathematical definitions of local realism in the sense of Bell and in the sense of Einstein are given. We demonstrate that if we include into the quantum mechanical formalism the space-time structure in the standard way then quantum mechanics might be consistent with Einstein's local realism. It shows that loopholes are unavoidable in experiments aimed to establish a violation of Bell`s inequalities. We show how the space-time structure can be considered from the contextual point of view. A mathematical framework for the contextual approach is outlined.
As we all know, Einstein disagreed with Born's probabilistic interpretation of wave-functions, which collapse abruptly once measurements are performed on the corresponding systems. In the Einstein-Bohr debate, Einstein considered quantum mechanics incomplete. Inspired by Einstein, Bell and his followers intended to complete quantum mechanics within the framework of local realism. Regrettably, deterministic correlations in Einstein's local-realist description of the world are mistaken for "nonlocal-interactions" (non-locality) in the world described by Bell's theorem, which leads to the questionable interpretation of the experimental results obtained by testing Bell inequalities. This article introduces a new principle, the general principle of measurements, which is proved as a mathematical theorem and allows quantum mechanics to be completed within the framework of local realism while keeping the axiomatic definition of a general Hilbert space essentially unchanged. Using disjunction ("or") as the logical relation between orthonormal vectors spanning a given Hilbert space, the completed quantum theory precludes inexplicable collapses of wave-functions and is intuitively comprehensible, thus alleviating much difficulty in understanding quantum mechanics. Among various world views, Einstein's local-realist world view is correct.
As we all know, Einstein disagreed with Born's probabilistic interpretation of wave-functions, which collapse abruptly once measurements are performed on the corresponding systems. In the Einstein-Bohr debate, Einstein considered quantum mechanics incomplete. Inspired by Einstein, Bell and his followers intended to complete quantum mechanics within the framework of local realism. Regrettably, deterministic correlations in Einstein's local-realist description of the world are mistaken for "nonlocal-interactions" (non-locality) in the world described by Bell's theorem, which leads to the questionable interpretation of the experimental results obtained by testing Bell inequalities. This article introduces a new principle, the general principle of measurements, which is proved as a mathematical theorem and allows quantum mechanics to be completed within the framework of local realism while keeping the axiomatic definition of a general Hilbert space essentially unchanged. Using disjunction ("or") as the logical relation between orthonormal vectors spanning a given Hilbert space, the completed quantum theory precludes inexplicable collapses of wave-functions and is intuitively comprehensible, thus alleviating much difficulty in understanding quantum mechanics. Among various world views, Einstein's local-realist world view is correct.
Fundamental principle of classical physics -- local realism, means that freely chosen observations can be explained by a local (slower than light) real process. It is apparently violated in quantum mechanics as shown by Bell theorem. Despite extreme efforts experiments have not conclusively confirmed this violation due to loopholes. We propose a new postulate that the description of quantum processes must be consistent with local realism, It also assumes existence of many worlds/copies of the same system, interacting weakly microscopically but strongly macroscopically, whose number can be estimated experimentally.Bell theorem will never address a real experiment because its assumptions cannot be strictly fulfilled. By an appropriate generalization of quantum framework and measurement postulates, in particular taking into account freedom of choice, local realism agrees with quantum mechanics and the performed experiments, also involving single qubit coherence and a weaker version of the Bell test, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering.