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:quant-ph/0206118

Shedding (red and green) light on "time related hidden parameters"

N. David Mermin

Published Jun 18, 2002• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

I explain in elementary terms why the critique of Hess and Philipp in Section 3.2 of quant-ph/0103028 fails to invalidate the nontechnical version of Bell's theorem I gave twenty years ago, involving two detectors with 3-pole switches and red and green lights.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0206118

Related papers

Inclusion of time in the theorem of Bell

N. David Mermin

I explain in elementary terms why time-dependent effects, including time-correlated hidden variables at the detectors, do not invalidate a simple version of Bell's theorem involving two detectors with 3-pole switches and red and green lights.

Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Jan 1, 2003•3 citations

Reply to the Comment by K. Hess and W. Philipp on “Inclusion of time in the theorem of Bell”

N. David Mermin

Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Aug 1, 2004•5 citations

Comment on “Exclusion of time in the theorem of Bell” by K. Hess and W. Philipp

Richard David Gill, Gregor Weihs, Anton Zeilinger +1 more

A recent Letter by Hess and Philipp claims that Bell's theorem neglects the possibility of time-like dependence in local hidden variables, hence is not conclusive. Moreover the authors claim that they have constructed, in an earlier paper, a local realistic model of the EPR correlations. However, they themselves have neglected the experimenter's freedom to choose settings, while on the other hand, Bell's theorem can be formulated to cope with time-like dependence. This in itself proves that their toy model cannot satisfy local realism, but we also indicate where their proof of its local realistic nature fails.

arXiv:quant-ph/0204169•Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Jan 1, 2003•19 citations

Bell's theorem in the presence of classical communication

N. David Mermin

I explain what kinds of correlation or even direct classical communication between detectors invalidate Bell's theorem, and what kinds do not.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207140•Jul 24, 2002•2 citations

Comment on Mermin's Recent Proof of the Theorem of Bell

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

Mermin states in a recent paper that his nontechnical version of Bell's theorem stands and is not invalidated by time and setting dependent instrument parameters as claimed in one of our previous papers. We identify a number of misinterpretations (of our definitions) and mathematical inconsistencies in Mermin's paper and show that Mermin's conclusions are therefore not valid: his proof does not go forward if certain possible time dependencies are taken into account.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207110•Jul 18, 2002•0 citations

No time loophole in Bell's theorem: The Hess–Philipp model is nonlocal

Richard David Gill, Gregor Weihs, Anton Zeilinger +1 more

Hess and Philipp recently claimed [(2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 14224-14227 and 14228-14233] that proofs of Bell's theorem have overlooked the possibility of time dependence in local hidden variables, hence the theorem has not been proven true. Moreover they present what is claimed to be a local realistic model of the EPR correlations. If this is true then Bell's theorem is not just unproven, but false. We refute both claims. First, we explain why time is not an issue in Bell's theorem, and second, we show that their hidden variables model violates Einstein separability. Hess and Philipp have overlooked the freedom of the experimenter to choose settings of a measurement apparatus at will: any setting could be in force during the same time period.

arXiv:quant-ph/0208187•Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences•Oct 31, 2002•34 citations
A recent Letter by Hess and Philipp claims that Bell's theorem neglects the possibility of time-like dependence in local hidden variables, hence is not conclusive. Moreover the authors claim that they have constructed, in an earlier paper, a local realistic model of the EPR correlations. However, they themselves have neglected the experimenter's freedom to choose settings, while on the other hand, Bell's theorem can be formulated to cope with time-like dependence. This in itself proves that their toy model cannot satisfy local realism, but we also indicate where their proof of its local realistic nature fails.
Hess and Philipp recently claimed [(2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 14224-14227 and 14228-14233] that proofs of Bell's theorem have overlooked the possibility of time dependence in local hidden variables, hence the theorem has not been proven true. Moreover they present what is claimed to be a local realistic model of the EPR correlations. If this is true then Bell's theorem is not just unproven, but false. We refute both claims. First, we explain why time is not an issue in Bell's theorem, and second, we show that their hidden variables model violates Einstein separability. Hess and Philipp have overlooked the freedom of the experimenter to choose settings of a measurement apparatus at will: any setting could be in force during the same time period.