Draft preprint paper abstract: Bell tests have occupied a central role in the interpretation of quantum mechanics for over sixty years, widely regarded as definitive evidence for quantum nonlocality and the impossibility of local hidden-variable theories. We argue that this centrality is methodologically misplaced. Bell test outcome functionals are many-to-one maps that collapse a physically rich quantum state into a single binary value per trial, discarding the overwhelming majority of the physical information and actualities present. Conclusions about quantum reality drawn from such maximally coarse-grained outputs cannot be regarded as definitive descriptions of the underlying ontic state. By contrast, three independent and universal physical constraints — the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP), the thermodynamic requirement of strictly nonzero entropy, and the Bekenstein entropy bound — each mandate irreducible dispersion in every physical process without exception. We propose that these pervasive, filter-free, and theoretically convergent constraints constitute stronger foundational evidence about quantum reality than Bell test statistics, and we examine the implications for the nonlocality interpretation. We do not claim Bell’s theorem is mathematically incorrect; we claim its physical regime is too narrow to support the sweeping ontological conclusions commonly attributed to it.
Draft preprint paper abstract: Bell tests have occupied a central role in the interpretation of quantum mechanics for over sixty years, widely regarded as definitive evidence for quantum nonlocality and the impossibility of local hidden-variable theories. We argue that this centrality is methodologically misplaced. Bell test outcome functionals are many-to-one maps that collapse a physically rich quantum state into a single binary value per trial, discarding the overwhelming majority of the physical information and actualities present. Conclusions about quantum reality drawn from such maximally coarse-grained outputs cannot be regarded as definitive descriptions of the underlying ontic state. By contrast, three independent and universal physical constraints — the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP), the thermodynamic requirement of strictly nonzero entropy, and the Bekenstein entropy bound — each mandate irreducible dispersion in every physical process without exception. We propose that these pervasive, filter-free, and theoretically convergent constraints constitute stronger foundational evidence about quantum reality than Bell test statistics, and we examine the implications for the nonlocality interpretation. We do not claim Bell’s theorem is mathematically incorrect; we claim its physical regime is too narrow to support the sweeping ontological conclusions commonly attributed to it.
Preprint paper abstract: We argue that Bell tests, while mathematically rigorous within their stated assumptions, operate in a regime that is fundamentally inconsistent with established physical principles including the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, the unattainability of zero entropy, and the Bekenstein bound. Specifically, we contend that the assumption of single-valued measurement outcomes—a cornerstone of Bell’s methodology—requires perfect localization of information that these principles forbid. We propose that physical measurements inherently produce multi-valued outcomes representable as sets of eigenvalues rather than single scalars. This multi-valued structure lacks a rigorously defined correlation product in current mathematics, analogous to the undefined product of kets |a⟩|b⟩. Consequently, Bell test conclusions regarding the incompatibility of locality and realism may be artifacts of imposing an inappropriate mathematical structure on physical reality. We outline the theoretical gap and suggest that experimental implementations using interference-based or other quantum hardware might physically realize the needed “set product” operations, enabling a new class of Bell-type experiments that probe correlations in the multi-valued regime. This work aims to stimulate discussion about whether current Bell tests address the correct mathematical framework for analyzing quantum correlations.
This article presents a systematic account of the EPR argument and Bell tests, focusing on rigorously established mathematical results and experimental evidence published up to the cut-off date of October 28, 2026. The assumptions of local factorization and measurement-setting independence are stated explicitly. The CHSH bound of 2 is proved, and the quantum bound of 2√2 is derived using operator methods and semidefinite certificates. The joint outcome probabilities for the singlet state are derived, and the no-signalling theorem is proved for completely positive, trace-preserving local operations. Separability is shown to imply Bell locality, and entanglement is carefully distinguished from the violation of a particular Bell inequality. For noisy two-qubit states, spin measurements are explicitly distinguished from binary strategies that allow constant outcomes. The account also includes explicit constructions of local distributions, Fine’s theorem, and self-testing bounds. Experimental evidence is examined together with the statistical assumptions underlying its analysis; historical interpretations and unconfirmed proposals are clearly identified as such. The 1930 photon box is also analysed, with a distinction drawn between a semiclassical reconstruction of the apparatus and an exact relation between energy and time evolution. These results do not, in themselves, constitute particle detections, enable superluminal communication, or single out a unique ontology.
Abstract Solid experimental evidence has now been obtained that confirms the violation of Bell’s inequality in tests of maximally entangled qubit pairs. This violation is widely interpreted as definitive proof of the impossibility of describing quantum phenomena in terms of locally defined elements of reality. In a series of recent papers, we have noticed, however, that this conclusion inadvertently, yet crucially, relies on the assumed existence of an absolute frame of reference, with respect to which it would be possible to describe independently of each other the hypothetical elements of reality and the measurement devices that test them. Otherwise, a non-zero geometric phase may appear in the description of the former with respect to a closed sequence of settings of the latter, leading to the violation of the inequality. Following this observation, we discuss an explicit statistical model, which fully reproduces the predictions of Quantum Mechanics for the Bell experiment.
While Bell’s theorem is traditionally seen as a total rejection of local classical models in quantum mechanics, this paper argues that such a conclusion relies on the narrow assumption of "joint definiteness." Bell’s derivation requires a single hidden state, λ, to account for all possible measurement outcomes simultaneously, which implies that the measurement apparatus remains microscopically unchanged regardless of its settings. However, because physical instruments are composed of matter, their internal microstates necessarily vary with the chosen settings, meaning the relevant hidden variables are setting-dependent. This physical reality prevents the formation of a global joint probability distribution, placing these types of models outside the mathematical constraints of Bell’s and Fine’s theorems. Consequently, the authors conclude that while Bell’s theorem remains mathematically sound, it only excludes hidden-variable models that ignore the setting-dependent nature of the measuring apparatus, leaving the door open for classical descriptions of physical reality.
Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiments with the experimental results explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to represent quantum information. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is introduced and proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiments for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality, actually Einstein’s viewpoint is irrelevant to Bell’s theorem. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate. The experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of various experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Without involving hidden variables, quantum mechanics can be completed based on the general principle of measurements by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space, and the mathematical setting can remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the real world. A very regrettable conclusion from the above findings is inevitable: Quantum information has no physical carriers, and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.
Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiments with the experimental results explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to represent quantum information. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is introduced and proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiments for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality, actually Einstein’s viewpoint is irrelevant to Bell’s theorem. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate. The experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of various experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Without involving hidden variables, quantum mechanics can be completed based on the general principle of measurements by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space, and the mathematical setting can remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the real world. A very regrettable conclusion from the above findings is inevitable: Quantum information has no physical carriers, and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.