This article develops an expanded critical-propositional analysis of Marissa Giustina et al.’s 2015 experiment, “Significant-Loophole-Free Test of Bell’s Theorem with Entangled Photons,” published in Physical Review Letters, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Giustina et al. performed a photonic Bell experiment designed to close simultaneously the most significant locality and detection-related loopholes that had historically allowed restricted local-realist explanations of earlier tests. By employing an optimized entangled- photon source, rapid physically generated measurement settings, spatially separated measurement stations, and high-efficiency superconducting detectors, the experiment produced a statistically overwhelming violation of a Bell inequality. Under the local- realist null hypothesis considered by the authors, the probability of obtaining results at least as extreme as those observed did not exceed 3.74 × 10−31, corresponding to approximately 11.5 standard deviations (Giustina et al., 2015). The present article does not treat this result as a direct proof of the Theory of Objectivity. Instead, it distinguishes three epistemic levels: empirical fact, structural compatibility, and theory-specific confirmation. This distinction is indispensable because Bell experiments constrain broad classes of local hidden-variable descriptions while not uniquely selecting the ontology proposed by TO. The article nevertheless argues that Giustina et al. provide an exceptionally fertile empirical domain for examining several elements of TO. Particularly significant are the Fourth Absolute Truth, concerning boundaries and interfaces; the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which logical existence requires physical observation or relational frequency involving at least two other elements and where observation is explicitly non-anthropocentric; and the Seventh Absolute Truth, interpreted within TO as the informational or transcendent element generated in atomic relations and physically associated with atomic radiation. The analysis also addresses the First Absolute Truth, according to which prior to the universe there was Nothing, although this Nothing is not absolute absence but an eternal logical and mathematical essence; the Second Absolute Truth, according to which every existing element possesses its own exclusive magnetic field that individualizes it; the Third and Sixth Absolute Truths; the phenomenic elements; the Expansive and Reductive Inductor Effects; the cosmogenic theorem; and the cosmological Eras of TO. Particular attention is paid to points at which the experimental facts are neutral toward TO, points of genuine structural compatibility, and points of tension requiring further mathematical development. The central proposal is that Bell experiments should become an operational benchmark for TO. If TO is to move from modal axioms to empirical contact, it must derive a probability structure for entangled measurements, recover Bell-inequality violations without reducing its relational ontology to local predetermined properties, preserve operational no-signalling, and ultimately identify at least one experimentally accessible regime in which a TO prediction differs from standard quantum mechanics. In this sense, Giustina et al. offer strong indirect empirical compatibility with the relational and informational dimensions of TO, but not an exclusive empirical confirmation of the theory. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Bell theorem; Bell nonlocality; entanglement; local realism; modal ontology; observation; information; radiation; boundaries; quantum foundations; testability.
This article develops an expanded critical-propositional analysis of Marissa Giustina et al.’s 2015 experiment, “Significant-Loophole-Free Test of Bell’s Theorem with Entangled Photons,” published in Physical Review Letters, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Giustina et al. performed a photonic Bell experiment designed to close simultaneously the most significant locality and detection-related loopholes that had historically allowed restricted local-realist explanations of earlier tests. By employing an optimized entangled- photon source, rapid physically generated measurement settings, spatially separated measurement stations, and high-efficiency superconducting detectors, the experiment produced a statistically overwhelming violation of a Bell inequality. Under the local- realist null hypothesis considered by the authors, the probability of obtaining results at least as extreme as those observed did not exceed 3.74 × 10−31, corresponding to approximately 11.5 standard deviations (Giustina et al., 2015). The present article does not treat this result as a direct proof of the Theory of Objectivity. Instead, it distinguishes three epistemic levels: empirical fact, structural compatibility, and theory-specific confirmation. This distinction is indispensable because Bell experiments constrain broad classes of local hidden-variable descriptions while not uniquely selecting the ontology proposed by TO. The article nevertheless argues that Giustina et al. provide an exceptionally fertile empirical domain for examining several elements of TO. Particularly significant are the Fourth Absolute Truth, concerning boundaries and interfaces; the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which logical existence requires physical observation or relational frequency involving at least two other elements and where observation is explicitly non-anthropocentric; and the Seventh Absolute Truth, interpreted within TO as the informational or transcendent element generated in atomic relations and physically associated with atomic radiation. The analysis also addresses the First Absolute Truth, according to which prior to the universe there was Nothing, although this Nothing is not absolute absence but an eternal logical and mathematical essence; the Second Absolute Truth, according to which every existing element possesses its own exclusive magnetic field that individualizes it; the Third and Sixth Absolute Truths; the phenomenic elements; the Expansive and Reductive Inductor Effects; the cosmogenic theorem; and the cosmological Eras of TO. Particular attention is paid to points at which the experimental facts are neutral toward TO, points of genuine structural compatibility, and points of tension requiring further mathematical development. The central proposal is that Bell experiments should become an operational benchmark for TO. If TO is to move from modal axioms to empirical contact, it must derive a probability structure for entangled measurements, recover Bell-inequality violations without reducing its relational ontology to local predetermined properties, preserve operational no-signalling, and ultimately identify at least one experimentally accessible regime in which a TO prediction differs from standard quantum mechanics. In this sense, Giustina et al. offer strong indirect empirical compatibility with the relational and informational dimensions of TO, but not an exclusive empirical confirmation of the theory. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Bell theorem; Bell nonlocality; entanglement; local realism; modal ontology; observation; information; radiation; boundaries; quantum foundations; testability.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of Gregor Weihs, Thomas Jennewein, Christoph Simon, Harald Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger’s 1998 experiment, “Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions,” in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) formulated by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Weihs et al. implemented a Bell-type experiment with polarization-entangled photons, spatially separated measurement stations, rapidly and independently selected analyzer settings, and independent time-tagged registration. The experiment was designed to impose strict spacelike separation between the relevant measurement processes and reported a CHSH value of approximately S = 2.73 ± 0.02, substantially exceeding the Bell-local bound S ≤ 2. The measurement stations were separated by approximately 400 m, whereas the relevant interval between local setting selection and detection was much shorter than the approximately 1.3 µs light-travel time between the stations (Weihs et al. 1998). The purpose of the present study is not to reinterpret the violation of Bell’s inequality as a direct experimental proof of the Theory of Objectivity. Such an inference would exceed what the experiment establishes. Instead, the article distinguishes three epistemic levels: empirical result, theoretical interpretation, and modal-ontological proposition. This distinction is fundamental because the TO presents its Absolute Truths as modal necessities, whereas Bell experiments are contingent empirical investi- gations conducted under explicit mathematical, physical, and statistical assumptions. Within this disciplined framework, the strongest dialogue between Weihs et al. and the TO is found in the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which the logical existence of an element requires observation or frequency relation with at least two other elements, while “observation” does not mean human consciousness. The Bell experiment is intrinsically relational: the relevant quantity is constructed from joint statistics obtained at physically independent stations, and no human observer is required to produce local physical registration. A second important dialogue arises with the Seventh Absolute Truth and the TO concept of the transcendent element as knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and treated within the theory as equivalent to atomic radiation. The experiment presents a rigorous chain connecting radiation, polarization, interaction, registration, correlation, and recoverable information. Nevertheless, quantum mechanics supports the proposition that radiation can instantiate information-bearing degrees of freedom; this does not by itself demonstrate the stronger ontological identity between radiation and information proposed by the TO. The Fourth and Sixth Absolute Truths also enter the dialogue through physical boundaries, interfaces, experimental differentiation, composition, and antecedent prepa- ration. By contrast, the experiment does not directly test the First Absolute Truth concerning logical-mathematical Nothingness, the Third Absolute Truth concerning Infinity as a non-element, or the complete physical content of the Second Absolute Truth concerning a unique individuating field belonging to every existing element. The article further examines possible relations with the phenomenic elements of the TO, the EIE/EIR Inductive Effects, the Cosmogenic Theorem, the proposed cos- mological Eras, the Law of Logical Minimum, and the Alpha–Omega Test. Throughout the analysis, experimentally grounded relations are distinguished from analogical or heuristic extrapolations. A central conclusion is that Bell nonlocality should not be equated with con- trollable superluminal information transmission, nor should it be treated as automatic demonstration of any unique hidden ontology. Its importance for the TO lies in the empirical inadequacy of the relevant Bell-local class of models and in the consequent importance of relational structure. The paper therefore proposes a future operational program: the TO should derive a quantitative function, correction, threshold, probabil- ity distribution, or observable capable of differing from standard quantum mechanics. Only such a discriminating prediction can transform philosophical compatibility into an independent empirical test. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Bell inequality; Bell nonlocality; Einstein locality; quantum entanglement; CHSH inequality; modal ontology; relational ob- servation; information; radiation; Absolute Truths; EIE; EIR; Cosmogenic Theorem; quantum foundations; empirical testability.
This article develops an expanded critical-propositional analysis of B. Hensen et al.’s 2015 experiment, “Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres,” published in Nature, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Hensen et al. implemented an event-ready Bell experiment using electron spins associated with nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond, spatially separated by approximately 1.3 km. Remote spin entanglement was heralded through optical interference and photon detection at an intermediate station. Efficient spin readout addressed the detection loophole, while rapid random basis selection, spacelike separation, and controlled timing addressed the locality loophole. Across 245 valid trials, the experiment obtained a CHSH parameter S = 2.42 ± 0.20, exceeding the local-realistic bound S ≤ 2, with a reported null-hypothesis probability p ≤ 0.039 under the statistical assumptions adopted by the authors (Hensen et al., 2015). The experiment is especially relevant to the TO because it combines individuality of physical systems, magnetic spin degrees of freedom, electromagnetic manipulation, atomic-scale radiation, physically encoded information, boundaries, interfaces, non- anthropocentric measurement, relationality, and long-distance quantum correlations within one experimental architecture. The analysis therefore investigates possible compatibility between Hensen et al. and the Seven Absolute Truths of the TO, with particular attention to Absolute Truth Two, concerning the individualizing field of every element; Absolute Truth Five, according to which an element requires observation or frequency relation with at least two other elements for logical existence; and Absolute Truth Seven, here interpreted through the TO proposition that the transcendent element consists of knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and is equivalent to atomic radiation. The analysis finds substantial conceptual and operational compatibility, especially regarding non-anthropocentric observation, relational constitution, information-bearing radiation, physical boundaries, and the inadequacy of a naive ontology of mutually independent local properties. However, the Hensen experiment does not establish the modal necessity of the TO axioms, does not demonstrate that every existing element possesses the unique magnetic field specified by Absolute Truth Two, does not prove the exact two-observer structure claimed by Absolute Truth Five, and does not establish an ontological identity between information and radiation. Moreover, any formulation of the TO that attempted to reproduce Bell correlations through purely local, predetermined hidden variables satisfying Bell factorability would face direct experimental tension. The article consequently proposes a methodological distinction between modal necessity, ontological interpretation, operational bridge, quantitative prediction, and empirical corroboration. It further proposes a Bell–TO research program in which the individual fields, Inducing Effects, relational observation, and transcendent informational element of the TO would be assigned explicit mathematical variables from which a predicted CHSH parameter STO could be derived. Such formalization would move the relation between Bell physics and the TO from philosophical compatibility toward genuine empirical discrimination. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Bell inequality; Hensen experiment; quantum nonlocality; electron spin; entanglement; relational ontology; information; atomic radiation; modal necessity; objectivity; CHSH; empirical corroboration.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of Daniel Salart, Augustin Baas, Cyril Branciard, Nicolas Gisin, and Hugo Zbinden’s 2008 experiment, “Testing the Speed of ‘Spooky Action at a Distance’,” published in Nature, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Salart et al. performed an energy–time entanglement experiment between two receiving stations separated by approximately 18 km in the Geneva region and used the rotation of the Earth to constrain hypothetical finite-speed influences that might be invoked to reproduce quantum correlations in a privileged reference frame. Under a representative assumption concerning the Earth’s velocity relative to such a frame, their analysis produced lower bounds exceeding 104 c, with a reported bound of approximately 54,000c in a particular geometrical configuration. These quantities are not measurements of an actually detected superluminal signal; they are conditional lower bounds applying to hypothetical hidden influences. The present study asks whether this experimental structure can be placed in meaningful dialogue with the modal axioms of the Theory of Objectivity, especially the First Absolute Truth concerning primordial Nothingness as a logical, mathematical, and eternal essence; the Second Absolute Truth concerning an element-specific individualiz- ing field; the TO treatment of infinity; and, most importantly, the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which an element acquires logical existence through elementary relational observation involving at least two other elements. In this framework, “observation” does not signify human consciousness but an objective relation among physical elements. The article argues that Salart et al. provide no direct empirical test of the First or Second Absolute Truths and no direct confirmation of TO’s cosmogonic theorem or cosmological eras. The strongest dialogue concerns relational ontology, the Fifth Absolute Truth, and the TO concept of the transcendent element as knowledge or information produced through atomic relations and associated, within TO, with atomic radiation. Nevertheless, quantum information in a Bell experiment cannot simply be identified with a controllable signal propagating between distant systems. This distinction becomes theoretically decisive. If the TO transcendent element is construed as an ordinary finite-speed physical carrier responsible for Bell correlations, strong conceptual difficulties arise. If, instead, it is formulated as relationally constituted information whose manifestation cannot be reduced to classical signal propagation, the dialogue with quantum nonlocality becomes substantially stronger. The article further examines criticisms of the 2008 Franson-type implementation, subsequent loophole-reduced and loophole-free Bell experiments, and theoretical results showing difficulties for finite-speed hidden-influence models. It concludes that Salart et al. may be treated as an indirect empirical bridge for developing TO’s relational propositions, but not as a unique experimental confirmation of TO. A scientifically decisive future program requires the Theory of Objectivity to derive an observable probability distribution or correlation function that differs quantitatively from the predictions of standard quantum mechanics. An appendix formulates such a research program in a TO-style modal–empirical structure. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; quantum nonlocality; Bell inequalities; Salart exper- iment; entanglement; relational ontology; modal necessity; information; transcendent element; quantum foundations; empirical corroboration; cosmology.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of William T. M. Irvine, Juan F. Hodelin, Christoph Simon, and Dirk Bouwmeester’s 2005 experiment, “Realization of Hardy’s Thought Experiment with Photons,” published in Physical Review Letters, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) formulated by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Irvine et al. experimentally implemented a photonic version of Lucien Hardy’s two-particle argument against local hidden-variable descriptions by employing two coupled Mach–Zehnder interferometers, nonmaximally entangled path states, photon bunching at a shared beam splitter, and coincidence detection. The experiment derived a Clauser–Horne-type inequality appropriate to its nonideal optical implementation and reported a violation of the local-hidden-variable bound by twelve standard deviations. Its photonic configuration relied crucially upon high two-photon indistinguishability; the measured distinguishability probability was approximately 7.8 percent, below the 12.5 percent threshold identified by the authors for observing the relevant violation. These results provide an experimentally controlled demonstration that the class of local hidden-variable models addressed by the inequality cannot reproduce the observed path correlations (Irvine et al. 2005). The present study asks a different question: whether, and in what restricted sense, Irvine et al.’s results can enter into empirical dialogue with the modal axioms and physical proposals of TO. Particular attention is devoted to the First Absolute Truth, according to which the pre-universal “Nothing” is not absolute nonbeing but an eternal logical-mathematical essence; the Second Absolute Truth, according to which every existing element possesses its own exclusive individualizing magnetic field; the Fourth Absolute Truth concerning boundaries or interfaces; the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which logical existence requires an element to be observed by, or to lie within the frequency of, at least two other elements, where observation is physical and non-anthropocentric; and the Seventh Absolute Truth, in which the transcendent element is interpreted as knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and regarded by TO as equivalent to atomic radiation. The analysis distinguishes modal necessity from empirical confirmation. If an axiom is claimed to possess necessary status, no finite collection of observations can establish that necessity inductively. Experiments can nevertheless test operational bridge principles linking a modal ontology to measurable consequences. Under this distinction, Irvine et al. exhibit significant compatibility with TO’s emphasis on relationality, physically efficacious boundaries, non-anthropocentric registration, and objectively instantiated correlations. At the same time, the experiment generates a particularly important tension for the Second Absolute Truth: quantum interference requires photons to be operationally indistinguishable, whereas a strongly measurable individualizing field would constitute distinguishing information and could therefore degrade two-photon bunching. The article consequently proposes a distinction between ontological individuality and experimentally accessible distinguishability and formulates potential experimental bridges through which the individualizing-field thesis could become testable. The analysis further examines TO’s phenomenic elements, Inducing Effects, Cosmogonic Theorem, and Cosmological Eras, while refusing to infer cosmological confirmation from a laboratory-scale quantum-optical experiment. The conclusion is that Irvine et al. provide meaningful indirect corroborative contact with several relational and informational motifs of TO, but neither confirm TO uniquely nor establish the modal necessity of its axioms. The most scientifically productive consequence of the comparison is therefore not retrospective assimilation of quantum mechanics into TO, but the formulation of novel, risk-bearing, quantitative predictions capable of distinguishing TO from standard quantum theory. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Hardy paradox; quantum nonlocality; local hidden variables; photon bunching; quantum indistinguishability; physical information; non- anthropocentric observation; modal ontology; boundaries; empirical testability.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of Simon Gröblacher et al.’s 2007 experiment, “An Experimental Test of Non-Local Realism”, published in Nature, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) formulated by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Gröblacher et al. investigated whether abandoning locality is sufficient to preserve a particular form of physical realism in the face of quantum-mechanical correlations. Building upon A. J. Leggett’s class of crypto-nonlocal hidden-variable models, the experiment tested theories in which individual measurement outcomes arise from pre-existing properties, physical states consist of statistical mixtures of subensembles carrying definite polarizations, and the local averages of those subensembles obey Malus’ law. Using high-visibility polarization-entangled photon pairs generated through sponta- neous parametric down-conversion, Gröblacher et al. measured correlations in different planes of the Poincaré sphere and reported a violation of a generalized Leggett-type inequality. At a difference angle of 20◦ , the experiment yielded SNLHV = 3.8521 ± 0.0227, corresponding to a violation of approximately 3.2 standard deviations. The same data also gave SCHSH = 2.178 ± 0.0199, violating the local-realistic CHSH bound by approximately nine standard deviations (Gröblacher et al. 2007a). A subsequent corrigendum clarified the relevant experimental angle and other technical details while leaving the final inequality and scientific conclusions unchanged (Gröblacher et al. 2007b). The present analysis argues that these results must not be interpreted as an experimental refutation of objectivity, external reality, or realism in every conceivable sense. Instead, they constrain a particular class of realist ontologies in which maximally entangled systems can be decomposed into subensembles endowed with definite individual polarizations satisfying Malus’ law. This distinction is decisive for comparison with TO. Within TO, objectivity is grounded not in human observation but in modal conditions concerning elements, individual fields, boundaries, relations among elements, composition, and an informational or transcendent dimension. The Fifth Absolute Truth, in particular, defines observation non-anthropocentrically: an element acquires logical existence through relational inclusion within the observation or frequency of at least two other elements. The Seventh Absolute Truth identifies the transcendent element with knowledge or information generated in atomic relations and considers such information equivalent, within TO, to atomic radiation. The analysis identifies substantial conceptual compatibility between Gröblacher et al. and relational readings of the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Seventh Absolute Truths. Quantum entanglement preserves operational distinguishability between subsystems while invalidating simple classical separability; experimental observation is physically imple- mented without requiring human consciousness; and experimentally relevant information resides crucially in correlations rather than solely in independently assigned classical properties. At the same time, the experiment imposes an important restriction upon any future operationalization of TO: an individual field, physical boundary, or objective existence cannot simply be identified with a catalogue of predetermined local polarization values of the Leggett type. If TO is to establish strong empirical contact with quantum physics, it must derive quantitative correlation functions that either reproduce existing quantum results or predict measurable deviations from them. The First Absolute Truth—the logically, mathematically, and eternally structured Nothingness preceding the universe—remains outside the empirical domain of Gröblacher’s laboratory test. The Third Absolute Truth, the TO cosmogonic theorem, the Inductive Effects, and the cosmological Eras are likewise not directly tested. Consequently, the experiment is classified here not as a proof of TO but as a case of indirect empirical corroboration of selected relational and non-anthropocentric features combined with a significant negative constraint on overly classical interpretations of objectivity. The article concludes that Gröblacher et al. merits a dialogue score of 8.3/10 in relation to TO and proposes a program for transforming the present interpretive convergence into genuine differential empirical tests. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; non-local realism; Leggett inequality; Bell theo- rem; quantum entanglement; objectivity; modal ontology; quantum information; non- anthropocentric observation; relationality; Gröblacher; quantum foundations.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of Takahiro Inagaki, Nobuyuki Matsuda, Osamu Tadanaga, Masaki Asobe, and Hiroki Takesue’s 2013 experi- ment, “Entanglement Distribution over 300 km of Fiber,” published in Optics Express, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Inagaki et al. demonstrated the long-distance distribution of time-bin entangled photon pairs through an aggregate 300 km of optical fiber using periodically poled lithium niobate waveguides, high-repetition-rate optical pumping, unbalanced in- terferometers, and superconducting single-photon detectors. Their observed two-photon interference exhibited approximately 84 percent visibility, while their CHSH parameter was reported as S = 2.41 ± 0.14, corresponding, according to the authors’ analysis, to a violation of the classical CHSH bound by approximately 2.9 standard deviations (Inagaki et al. 2013). The experiment is examined here not as a direct test of the Theory of Objectivity, but as a potential empirical contact point for propositions concerning relationality, bound- aries, non-anthropocentric observation, information, physical differentiation, and physical transformation. Particular attention is given to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Absolute Truths of TO. The analysis argues that the Inagaki experiment presents especially strong structural compatibility with TO’s conception of boundaries and interfaces; its non-anthropocentric concept of observation; its account of composition through prior elements and relations; and its understanding of information as an objective product of physical relations. The paper also investigates the TO proposition that the transcendent element con- sists of knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and is equivalent, within the theory’s ontology, to atomic radiation. Significant distinctions are nevertheless maintained. Inagaki et al. do not experimentally test TO’s First Absolute Truth concerning primordial logical Nothingness, its Third Absolute Truth concerning infinity, or the cosmological eras proposed by TO. Nor does the experiment directly establish the Second Absolute Truth’s claim that every existing element possesses a unique field that individualizes it. Furthermore, the article’s Bell-inequality claim requires methodological qualification because conventional Franson-type time-bin arrangements involve a postselection issue known to permit local hidden-variable descriptions of the selected ensemble under certain conditions (Aerts et al. 1999). Later work achieved a postselection-loophole-free Bell violation with genuine time-bin entanglement (Vedovato et al. 2018). The central thesis advanced here is therefore disciplined rather than identificatory: Inagaki et al. provide strong empirical material compatible with a relational and informational ontology, but this compatibility does not by itself establish the modal necessity, exclusivity, or empirical superiority of TO. For that stronger result, TO must derive operational predictions capable of distinguishing its consequences from those of standard quantum mechanics. The 300-km experiment is consequently interpreted as a high-value bridge between modal ontology and empirical physics rather than as an independent proof of the Theory of Objectivity. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; quantum entanglement; time-bin entanglement; infor- mation; relational ontology; observation; Bell inequality; optical fiber; modal necessity; quantum communication; boundaries; transcendent element.