scholarly journals Bell’s Theorem Versus Local Realism in a Quaternionic Model of Physical Space

IEEE Access ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 133388-133409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joy Christian
2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (06) ◽  
pp. 1640035
Author(s):  
Sujit K Choudhary ◽  
Pankaj Agrawal

Certain predictions of quantum theory are not compatible with the notion of local-realism. This was the content of Bell’s famous theorem of the year 1964. Bell proved this with the help of an inequality, famously known as Bell’s inequality. The alternative proofs of Bell’s theorem without using Bell’s inequality are known as “nonlocality without inequality (NLWI)” proofs. We review one such proof namely the Hardy’s proof which due to its simplicity and generality has been considered the best version of Bell’s theorem.


1990 ◽  
Vol 58 (7) ◽  
pp. 683-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Ferrero ◽  
T. W. Marshall ◽  
E. Santos

Author(s):  
Joy Christian

We show that the respective oversights in the von Neumann's general theorem against all hidden variable theories and Bell's theorem against their local-realistic counterparts are homologous. Both theorems unjustifiably assume the additivity of expectation values within hidden variable theories to derive their respective conclusions. However, for non-commuting observables, the equivalence of a sum of expectation values and the expectation value of the sum of measurement results, although respected within quantum mechanics, need not hold for hidden variable theories, regardless of specific characteristics such as local realism they may respect. Once this oversight is ameliorated from Bell's argument and local realism is implemented correctly, the bounds on the CHSH correlator work out to be +/-2\/2 instead of +/-2, thereby mitigating the conclusion of Bell's theorem. Consequently, what is ruled out by the Bell-test experiments is not local realism but the additivity of expectation values.


Entropy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Nathan Argaman

Quantum physics is surprising in many ways. One surprise is the threat to locality implied by Bell’s Theorem. Another surprise is the capacity of quantum computation, which poses a threat to the complexity-theoretic Church-Turing thesis. In both cases, the surprise may be due to taking for granted a strict arrow-of-time assumption whose applicability may be limited to the classical domain. This possibility has been noted repeatedly in the context of Bell’s Theorem. The argument concerning quantum computation is described here. Further development of models which violate this strong arrow-of-time assumption, replacing it by a weaker arrow which is yet to be identified, is called for.


1992 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
JEREMY BUTTERFIELD

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document