Can we violate Bell inequalities by giving up CFD?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the potential to violate Bell inequalities by relinquishing counterfactual definiteness (CFD) while maintaining locality. Participants argue that entanglement and quantum mechanics (QM) do not require mystical explanations; rather, they involve correlations arising from superposition. The conversation highlights the distinction between classical and quantum correlations, emphasizing that giving up CFD allows for the acceptance of qubits instead of classical bits. It is noted that while locality can be preserved by avoiding superluminal signaling, predictability must be sacrificed to align with Bell's theorem. Ultimately, the dialogue underscores the foundational principles of QM in understanding entangled systems and their correlations.
  • #151
Derek Potter said:
zonde - just call it physical realism :)
You are too radical. Physical realism allows probabilistic results just as well but we speak about CFD only in case of definite results.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
zonde said:
You are too radical. Physical realism allows probabilistic results just as well but we speak about CFD only in case of definite results.
No problem, I'd already deleted the comment when you replied :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
7K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
8K
Replies
11
Views
2K