2007/07/31 by Travis Norsen · 148 citations
Arts and Humanities · Mathematics · Medicine · Physics and Astronomy · #Argument (complex analysis) #Bell state #Bell test experiments #Bell's theorem #Biofield Effects and Biophysics #CHSH inequality #Causality (physics) #Determinism #EPR paradox #Einstein #Epistemology #Fundamental theorem #Hidden variable theory #Kochen–Specker theorem #Local hidden variable theory #Mathematics #Meaning (existential) #No-go theorem #Observer (physics) #Philosophy #Philosophy and History of Science #Physics #Principle of locality #Pure mathematics #Quantum #Quantum Mechanics and Applications #Quantum entanglement #Quantum mechanics #Quantum nonlocality #Theoretical physics #quant-ph
paper · pdf · doi:10.1119/1.3630940
published in American Journal of Physics 79(12), 1261-1275 (American Institute of Physics) · 19 pages, 4 figures
arxiv created 2011/03/10 · openalex publication_date 2011/11/29 · arxiv updated 2015/05/12 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
John Stewart Bell’s famous theorem is widely regarded as one of the most important developments in the foundations of physics. Yet even as we approach the 50th anniversary of Bell’s discovery, its meaning and implications remain controversial. Many workers assert that Bell’s theorem refutes the possibility suggested by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) of supplementing ordinary quantum theory with “hidden” variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer-independent reality. But Bell himself interpreted the theorem very differently—as establishing an “essential conflict” between the well-tested empirical predictions of quantum theory and relativistic local causality. Our goal is to make Bell’s own views more widely known and to explain Bell’s little-known formulation of the concept of relativistic local causality on which his theorem rests. We also show precisely how Bell’s formulation of local causality can be used to derive an empirically testable Bell-type inequality and to recapitulate the EPR argument.