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

Quantum mechanics: completely unhidden?A critical review of the work of Colbeck and Renner

Gijs Leegwater

Published Sep 9, 2013• 1 citation
OpenAlex

Abstract

In this thesis a recent claim by Roger Colbeck and Renato Renner is reviewed [18]. This claim concerns the completeness of quantum mechanics. Colbeck and Renner state that no theory can be constructed that is compatible with quantum mechanics, and gives more detailed predictions through supplemental variables added to the description of the state of a system. Their only assumption is that measurement settings can be choosen freely. We will argue that their result is for the most part valid and interesting, but the freedom assumption is not so innocent as it is presented, and parts of the result need to be clarified. Therefore, we will present a reformulation of the result. In our formulation the result is a no-go theorem for hidden variable theories satisfying Parameter Independence. This is a generalization of Bell’s theorem. Performed in the period 01-11-2012 14-08-2012

Related papers

Extending Bell's Theorem: Ruling out Paramater Independent Hidden Variable Theories

Gijs Leegwater

Bell's Theorem may well be the best known result in the foundations of quantum mechanics. Here, it is presented as stating that for any hidden variable theory the combination of the conditions Parameter Independence, Outcome Independence, Source Independence and Compatibility with Quantum Theory leads to a contradiction. Based on work by Roger Colbeck and Renato Renner, an extension of Bell's Theorem is considered. In this extension the theorem is strengthened by replacing Outcome Independence by a strictly weaker condition.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Mar 1, 2016•0 citations

Completely real? A critical note on the claims by Colbeck and Renner

Ronnie Hermens

In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Leifer, Landsman and Leegwater, I present and prove two results that only partially support this claim. I then discuss the arguments by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater concerning how these results are to generalize to the full claim. This argument turns out to hinge on the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I argue that this assumption is unsatisfactory and that possible attempts to validate it based on measurement theory also do not succeed.

•Jul 4, 2019•5 citations

Completely Real? A Critical Note on the Theorems by Colbeck and Renner

Ronnie Hermens

In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner (2011, 2015a,b) claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Landsman (2015) and Leegwater (2016) I highlight the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I show that the assumption is quite crucial to the proof of the claim and argue that it is unwarranted. I further discuss a possible validation for a restricted version of this assumption that is based on considerations of measurement processes. I argue that also this restricted version is unsatisfactory.

•Jul 4, 2019•0 citations

Completely real? A critical note on the claims by Colbeck and Renner

Ronnie Hermens

In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner (2011, 2015a, 2015b) claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Leifer (2014), Landsman (2015) and Leegwater (2016), I present and prove two results that only partially support this claim. I then discuss the arguments by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater concerning how these results are to generalize to the full claim. This argument turns out to hinge on the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I argue that this assumption is unsatisfactory and that possible attempts to validate it based on measurement theory also do not succeed.

arXiv:2008.01444•Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics•Nov 1, 2020•3 citations

On the Colbeck–Renner theorem

Klaas Landsman

In three papers, Colbeck and Renner [Nat. Commun. 2, 411 (2011); Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 150402 (2012); e-print arXiv:1208.4123] argued that “no alternative theory compatible with quantum theory and satisfying the freedom of choice assumption can give improved predictions.” We give a more precise version of the formulation and proof of this remarkable claim. Our proof broadly follows theirs, which relies on physically well motivated axioms, but to fill in some crucial details, certain technical assumptions have had to be added, whose physical status seems somewhat obscure.

arXiv:1509.08498•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Dec 1, 2015•8 citations

On local-hidden-variable no-go theorems

André Allan Méthot

The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimatly doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. 1

•Jul 15, 2005•11 citations
In this thesis a recent claim by Roger Colbeck and Renato Renner is reviewed [18]. This claim concerns the completeness of quantum mechanics. Colbeck and Renner state that no theory can be constructed that is compatible with quantum mechanics, and gives more detailed predictions through supplemental variables added to the description of the state of a system. Their only assumption is that measurement settings can be choosen freely. We will argue that their result is for the most part valid and interesting, but the freedom assumption is not so innocent as it is presented, and parts of the result need to be clarified. Therefore, we will present a reformulation of the result. In our formulation the result is a no-go theorem for hidden variable theories satisfying Parameter Independence. This is a generalization of Bell’s theorem. Performed in the period 01-11-2012 14-08-2012
Bell's Theorem may well be the best known result in the foundations of quantum mechanics. Here, it is presented as stating that for any hidden variable theory the combination of the conditions Parameter Independence, Outcome Independence, Source Independence and Compatibility with Quantum Theory leads to a contradiction. Based on work by Roger Colbeck and Renato Renner, an extension of Bell's Theorem is considered. In this extension the theorem is strengthened by replacing Outcome Independence by a strictly weaker condition.
In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Leifer, Landsman and Leegwater, I present and prove two results that only partially support this claim. I then discuss the arguments by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater concerning how these results are to generalize to the full claim. This argument turns out to hinge on the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I argue that this assumption is unsatisfactory and that possible attempts to validate it based on measurement theory also do not succeed.
In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner (2011, 2015a,b) claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Landsman (2015) and Leegwater (2016) I highlight the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I show that the assumption is quite crucial to the proof of the claim and argue that it is unwarranted. I further discuss a possible validation for a restricted version of this assumption that is based on considerations of measurement processes. I argue that also this restricted version is unsatisfactory.
In a series of papers Colbeck and Renner (2011, 2015a, 2015b) claim to have shown that the quantum state provides a complete description for the prediction of future measurement outcomes. In this paper I argue that thus far no solid satisfactory proof has been presented to support this claim. Building on the earlier work of Leifer (2014), Landsman (2015) and Leegwater (2016), I present and prove two results that only partially support this claim. I then discuss the arguments by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater concerning how these results are to generalize to the full claim. This argument turns out to hinge on the implicit use of an assumption concerning the way unitary evolution is to be represented in any possible completion of quantum mechanics. I argue that this assumption is unsatisfactory and that possible attempts to validate it based on measurement theory also do not succeed.
In three papers, Colbeck and Renner [Nat. Commun. 2, 411 (2011); Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 150402 (2012); e-print arXiv:1208.4123] argued that “no alternative theory compatible with quantum theory and satisfying the freedom of choice assumption can give improved predictions.” We give a more precise version of the formulation and proof of this remarkable claim. Our proof broadly follows theirs, which relies on physically well motivated axioms, but to fill in some crucial details, certain technical assumptions have had to be added, whose physical status seems somewhat obscure.
The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimatly doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. 1