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

arXiv:gr-qc/0006072

Relativistic Quantum Non-Locality

Erast B. Gliner

Published Jun 20, 2000• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The controversy between relativistic causality and quantum non-locality can be resolved by establishing the general relativistic background of quantum non-locality.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.gr-qc/0006072

Related papers

Quantum Non-Locality: An Epistemological Overview

Michele Caponigro

We present, in this paper, some epistemological positions about quantum non-locality. Each position attempts to resolve philosophic questions raised by QM nonlocality.

Prespacetime journal•Nov 23, 2017•0 citations

John S. Bell’s concept of local causality

Travis Norsen

John Stewart Bell’s famous theorem is widely regarded as one of the most important developments in the foundations of physics. Yet even as we approach the 50th anniversary of Bell’s discovery, its meaning and implications remain controversial. Many workers assert that Bell’s theorem refutes the possibility suggested by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) of supplementing ordinary quantum theory with “hidden” variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer-independent reality. But Bell himself interpreted the theorem very differently—as establishing an “essential conflict” between the well-tested empirical predictions of quantum theory and relativistic local causality. Our goal is to make Bell’s own views more widely known and to explain Bell’s little-known formulation of the concept of relativistic local causality on which his theorem rests. We also show precisely how Bell’s formulation of local causality can be used to derive an empirically testable Bell-type inequality and to recapitulate the EPR argument.

arXiv:0707.0401•American Journal of Physics•Nov 29, 2011•148 citations

On quantum entanglement, counterfactuals, causality and dispositions

Tomasz Bigaj

Abstract The existence of non-local correlations between outcomes of measurements in quantum entangled systems strongly suggests that we are dealing with some form of causation here. An assessment of this conjecture in the context of the collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics is the primary goal of this paper. Following the counterfactual approach to causation, I argue that the details of the underlying causal mechanism which could explain the non-local correlations in entangled states strongly depend on the adopted semantics for counterfactuals. Several relativistically-invariant interpretations of spatiotemporal counterfactual conditionals are discussed, and the corresponding causal stories describing interactions between parts of an entangled system are evaluated. It is observed that the most controversial feature of the postulated causal connections is not so much their non-local character as a peculiar type of circularity that affects them.

Synthese•Jan 12, 2017•5 citations

The quest for understanding in relativistic quantum physics

Detlev Buchholz A, Rudolf Haag

We discuss the status and some perspectives of relativistic quantum physics.

arXiv:hep-th/9910243•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jun 1, 2000•34 citations

Is it Possible to Save Causality and Locality in Quantum Mechanics?

Eftichios Bitsakis

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1985•1 citation

Contextual inferences, (non)locality, and the (in)completeness of quantum mechanics

Philippe Grangier

In this article we argue that what is usually called non locality, leading to the violation of Bell's inequality and more generally of classical local realism, can be explained by considering contextual inferences, that are both possible and necessary in quantum physics. They do not show up in classical physics, where contexts may be discarded because physical properties are non-contextual. This analysis allows us to explain why non locality does not contradict relativistic causality. Our argument is general from a probabilistic point of view, and it strongly suggests that the usual quantum formalism must be completed, by specifying the measurement context.

•Dec 17, 2020•2 citations
John Stewart Bell’s famous theorem is widely regarded as one of the most important developments in the foundations of physics. Yet even as we approach the 50th anniversary of Bell’s discovery, its meaning and implications remain controversial. Many workers assert that Bell’s theorem refutes the possibility suggested by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) of supplementing ordinary quantum theory with “hidden” variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer-independent reality. But Bell himself interpreted the theorem very differently—as establishing an “essential conflict” between the well-tested empirical predictions of quantum theory and relativistic local causality. Our goal is to make Bell’s own views more widely known and to explain Bell’s little-known formulation of the concept of relativistic local causality on which his theorem rests. We also show precisely how Bell’s formulation of local causality can be used to derive an empirically testable Bell-type inequality and to recapitulate the EPR argument.
Abstract The existence of non-local correlations between outcomes of measurements in quantum entangled systems strongly suggests that we are dealing with some form of causation here. An assessment of this conjecture in the context of the collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics is the primary goal of this paper. Following the counterfactual approach to causation, I argue that the details of the underlying causal mechanism which could explain the non-local correlations in entangled states strongly depend on the adopted semantics for counterfactuals. Several relativistically-invariant interpretations of spatiotemporal counterfactual conditionals are discussed, and the corresponding causal stories describing interactions between parts of an entangled system are evaluated. It is observed that the most controversial feature of the postulated causal connections is not so much their non-local character as a peculiar type of circularity that affects them.
In this article we argue that what is usually called non locality, leading to the violation of Bell's inequality and more generally of classical local realism, can be explained by considering contextual inferences, that are both possible and necessary in quantum physics. They do not show up in classical physics, where contexts may be discarded because physical properties are non-contextual. This analysis allows us to explain why non locality does not contradict relativistic causality. Our argument is general from a probabilistic point of view, and it strongly suggests that the usual quantum formalism must be completed, by specifying the measurement context.