arXiv:quant-ph/0305037

Exclusion of Time in Mermin's Proof of Bell-Type Inequalities

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

Published May 7, 2003• 4 citations

Abstract

Mermin states 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 deviations from well-established protocol in probability theory as well as mathematical contradictions in Mermin's argument 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.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0305037

Related papers

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/0207110Jul 18, 20020 citations

Classical information and Mermin's non-technical proof of the theorem of Bell

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

We show that Mermin's reasoning against our refutation of his non-technical proof for Bell-type inequalities is of limited significance or contains mathematical inconsistencies that, when taken into account, do not permit his proof to go forward. Our refutation therefore stands.

arXiv:quant-ph/0208086Aug 13, 20021 citation

Bell’s theorem: Critique of proofs with and without inequalities

K. Hess

Most of the standard proofs of the Bell theorem are based on the Kolmogorov axioms of probability theory. We show that these proofs contain mathematical steps that cannot be reconciled with the Kolmogorov axioms. Specifically we demonstrate that these proofs ignore the conclusion of a theorem of Vorob'ev on the consistency of joint distributions. As a consequence Bell's theorem stated in its full generality remains unproven, in particular, for extended parameter spaces that are still objective local and that include instrument parameters that are correlated by both time and instrument settings. Although the Bell theorem correctly rules out certain small classes of hidden variables, for these extended parameter spaces the standard proofs come to a halt. The Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) approach is based on similar fallacious arguments. For this case we are able to present an objective local computer experiment that simulates the experimental test of GHZ performed by Pan, Bouwmeester, Daniell, Weinfurter and Zeilinger and that directly contradicts their claim that Einstein-local elements of reality can neither explain the results of quantum mechanical theory nor their experimental results.

arXiv:quant-ph/0410015AIP conference proceedingsJan 1, 200587 citations

Time and setting dependent instrument parameters and proofs of Bell-type inequalities

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

We show that all proofs of Bell-type inequalities, as discussed in Bell's well known book and as claimed to be relevant to Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen type experiments, come to a halt when Einstein-local time and setting dependent instrument parameters are included.

arXiv:quant-ph/0211117Nov 19, 20022 citations

Breakdown of Bell's theorem for certain objective local parameter spaces

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

We show that the known proofs of Bell's inequalities contain algebraic manipulations that are not appropriate within the syntax of Kolmogorov's axioms for probability theory without detailed justification. Such justification can be achieved by a variant of the techniques used in Bell-type proofs but only for a subclass of objective local parameter spaces. It cannot be achieved for an extended parameter space that is still objective local and that includes instrument parameters correlated by both time and setting dependencies.

Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesJan 22, 200440 citations

A possible loophole in the theorem of Bell

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

The celebrated inequalities of Bell are based on the assumption that local hidden parameters exist. When combined with conflicting experimental results, these inequalities appear to prove that local hidden parameters cannot exist. This contradiction suggests to many that only instantaneous action at a distance can explain the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen type of experiments. We show that, in addition to the assumption that hidden parameters exist, Bell tacitly makes a variety of other assumptions that contribute to his being able to obtain the desired contradiction. For instance, Bell assumes that the hidden parameters do not depend on time and are governed by a single probability measure independent of the analyzer settings. We argue that the exclusion of time has neither a physical nor a mathematical basis but is based on Bell's translation of the concept of Einstein locality into the language of probability theory. Our additional set of local hidden variables includes time-like correlated parameters and a generalized probability density. We prove that our extended space of local hidden variables does not permit Bell-type proofs to go forward.

Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesNov 27, 200181 citations