© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

Terms Privacy Legal Notice

arXiv:quant-ph/9805047

Is quantum mechanics non-local?

Henry Pierce Stapp

Published May 15, 1998• 0 citations

Abstract

A recent proof, couched in the symbolic language of modal logic, shows that a well-defined formulation of the question posed in the title is answered affirmatively. In a paper with the same title Unruh has tried in various ways to translate the symbolic proof into normal prose, and has claimed that the proof must fail in some way or another. A correct translation is given here, and it is explained why the difficulties encountered by Unruh do not actually arise.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9805047

Related papers

Comment on ``Possibility of quantum mechanics being nonlocal''

Henry Pierce Stapp

A recent proof, formulated in the symbolic language of modal logic, shows that a well-defined formulation of the possibility mentioned in the title is answered affirmatively. In the paper being commented upon several proposals were made about how to translate this symbolic proof into prose, and it was concluded, on the basis of those proposed translations, that either the proof was invalid or that an unwarranted reality assumption was made. However, those interpretations deviate in small but important ways from the precise logical path followed in the proof. It is explained here how by staying on this path one avoids the difficulties that those deviations engendered.

arXiv:quant-ph/9806070•Jun 21, 1998•0 citations

Is Quantum Mechanics Non-Local?

William George Unruh

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2002•18 citations

Comment on “Nonlocality, counterfactuals, and quantum mechanics”

Henry Pierce Stapp

A recent proof [H. P. Stapp, Am. J. Phys. 65, 300 (1997)], formulated in the symbolic language of modal logic, claims to show that contemporary quantum theory, viewed as a set of rules that allow us to calculate statistical predictions among certain kinds of observations, cannot be imbedded in any rational framework that conforms to the principles that (1) the experimenters' choices of which experiments they will perform can be considered to be free choices, (2) outcomes of measurements are unique, and (3) the free choices just mentioned have no backward-in-time effects of any kind. This claim is similar to Bell's theorem, but much stronger, because no reality assumption alien to quantum philosophy is used. The paper being commented on [W. Unruh, Phys. Rev. A 59, 126 (1999)] argues that some such reality assumption has been ``smuggled'' in. That argument is examined here and shown, I believe, to be defective.

Physical Review A•Sep 1, 1999•11 citations

Some further comments on the Selleri-Tarozzi proof of the nonlocality of quantum mechanics

Willy De Baere

Physics Letters A•Aug 1, 1988•0 citations

A thinking on Quantum Physics and common sense

Carlo Artemi

The author attempts to answer the questions there are in the title of this paper. These questions are questions that scientists and philosophers have been asking themselves for many decades since Quantum Mechanics was formulated to explain the phenomena of the atomic and subatomic world. First of all a short but complete historical review of the transition between Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics there is. It is preceded by some of the methodological premises that fit a certain vision of science. Then the author examines the issues and debates that have occurred on aspects of quantum mechanics such as realism, non-locality and probabilism (in contrast to determinism of Classic Mechanics). In doing this author llustrates the foundations of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics which, in an attempt to resolve these problems, have been given. The absurdities, and conflicts with the common sense, of quantum mechanics are shown to be largely apparent. In doing this, we examine the analogies of classical physics, as well as those of everyday life. Recent experimental results are taken into consideration. It is concluded that Quantum Mechanics presents elements of rupture more with Classical Physics than with the everyday experience.

Advanced Research Journal•Feb 22, 2025•0 citations

Dynamic Bidirectional Cognitive–Quantum Translation Lattice (DBCQTL): A Coherence-Based Interface Architecture

Norbert Bedoucha

Before Language: How Meaning Exists Before Words is a full manuscript developing a broad theory of meaning reconstruction before symbolic language. It argues that meaning is not carried by symbols themselves, but reconstructed from the structures those symbols compress. When the required structure cannot be rebuilt, the mind produces a coherent substitute: structural substitution. The manuscript develops this mechanism across bridge, music, medicine, archaeology, artificial intelligence, real estate disclosure, design, ancient astronomical encoding, and quantum-interface questions. It synthesizes the author’s prior research sequence into a non-specialist account of how signals travel, why meaning often fails to survive transmission, and why coherence should not be mistaken for correctness.

•Apr 5, 2026•1 citation

A recent proof, couched in the symbolic language of modal logic, shows that a well-defined formulation of the question posed in the title is answered affirmatively. In a paper with the same title Unruh has tried in various ways to translate the symbolic proof into normal prose, and has claimed that the proof must fail in some way or another. A correct translation is given here, and it is explained why the difficulties encountered by Unruh do not actually arise.

A recent proof, formulated in the symbolic language of modal logic, shows that a well-defined formulation of the possibility mentioned in the title is answered affirmatively. In the paper being commented upon several proposals were made about how to translate this symbolic proof into prose, and it was concluded, on the basis of those proposed translations, that either the proof was invalid or that an unwarranted reality assumption was made. However, those interpretations deviate in small but important ways from the precise logical path followed in the proof. It is explained here how by staying on this path one avoids the difficulties that those deviations engendered.

A recent proof [H. P. Stapp, Am. J. Phys. 65, 300 (1997)], formulated in the symbolic language of modal logic, claims to show that contemporary quantum theory, viewed as a set of rules that allow us to calculate statistical predictions among certain kinds of observations, cannot be imbedded in any rational framework that conforms to the principles that (1) the experimenters' choices of which experiments they will perform can be considered to be free choices, (2) outcomes of measurements are unique, and (3) the free choices just mentioned have no backward-in-time effects of any kind. This claim is similar to Bell's theorem, but much stronger, because no reality assumption alien to quantum philosophy is used. The paper being commented on [W. Unruh, Phys. Rev. A 59, 126 (1999)] argues that some such reality assumption has been ``smuggled'' in. That argument is examined here and shown, I believe, to be defective.

The author attempts to answer the questions there are in the title of this paper. These questions are questions that scientists and philosophers have been asking themselves for many decades since Quantum Mechanics was formulated to explain the phenomena of the atomic and subatomic world. First of all a short but complete historical review of the transition between Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics there is. It is preceded by some of the methodological premises that fit a certain vision of science. Then the author examines the issues and debates that have occurred on aspects of quantum mechanics such as realism, non-locality and probabilism (in contrast to determinism of Classic Mechanics). In doing this author llustrates the foundations of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics which, in an attempt to resolve these problems, have been given. The absurdities, and conflicts with the common sense, of quantum mechanics are shown to be largely apparent. In doing this, we examine the analogies of classical physics, as well as those of everyday life. Recent experimental results are taken into consideration. It is concluded that Quantum Mechanics presents elements of rupture more with Classical Physics than with the everyday experience.

Before Language: How Meaning Exists Before Words is a full manuscript developing a broad theory of meaning reconstruction before symbolic language. It argues that meaning is not carried by symbols themselves, but reconstructed from the structures those symbols compress. When the required structure cannot be rebuilt, the mind produces a coherent substitute: structural substitution. The manuscript develops this mechanism across bridge, music, medicine, archaeology, artificial intelligence, real estate disclosure, design, ancient astronomical encoding, and quantum-interface questions. It synthesizes the author’s prior research sequence into a non-specialist account of how signals travel, why meaning often fails to survive transmission, and why coherence should not be mistaken for correctness.