Bell's theorem is generally thought to show that the world cannot be both local and real. 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?