Bell's theorem is generally thought to show that the world cannot be both local and real.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem

In simplistic terms, Bell derives an inequality which allegedly must be satisfied if the world is both local and real. In practice, it is found in numerous experiments that Bell's inequality is actually violated - leading to the conclusion that either the locality assumption, or the reality assumption, (or both) must be rejected.

But the following paper allegedly provides a counterexample - a hypothetical situation which involves assumptions that are most definitely both local and real, and yet the scenario described would also violate Bell-type inequalities if analysed in a manner similar to that used for Bell's theorem.

http://rugth30.phys.rug.nl/pdf/aipqo0-KRM.pdf [Broken]

Conclusion: Violation of Bell-type inequalities does not necessarily always imply that either locality or realism assumptions are incorrect?

Comments?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Bell's Inequality: Must we ditch locality, realism or something else?

Loading...

Similar Threads - Bell's Inequality Must | Date |
---|---|

B Understanding Bell’s inequality | Jan 6, 2018 |

B A question about Bell's Inequality and hidden variables | Oct 8, 2017 |

A Quantum measurement with incomplete basis? | Aug 26, 2017 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**