Emilio Santos has argued (Santos, Studies in History and Philosophy of Physics http: //arxiv-org/abs/quant-ph/0410193) that to date, no experiment has provided a loophole-free refutation of Bell’s inequalities. He believes that this provides strong evidence for the principle of local realism, and argues that we should reject this principle only if we have extremely strong evidence. However, recent work by Malley and Fine (Non-commuting observables and local realism, http: //arxiv-org/abs/quant-ph/0505016) appears to suggest that experiments refuting Bell’s inequalities could at most confirm that quantum mechanical quantities do not commute. They also suggest that experiments performed on a single system could refute local realism. In this paper, we develop a connection between the work of Malley and Fine and an argument by Bub from some years ago [Bub, The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Chapter VI(Reidel, Dodrecht,1974)]. We also argue that the appearance of conflict between Santos on the one hand and Malley and Fine on the other is a result of differences in the way they understand local realism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beltrametti E.G. and Cassinelli G. (1981). The Logic of Quantum Mechanics. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
Bub J. (1974). The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Chapter VI. Reidel, Dodrecht
P. Busch, “Quantum States and Generalized Observables: A Simple Proof of Gleason’s Theorem,” http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9909073.
A. Einstein, “Quantenmechanik und Wirklichkeit,” Dialectica 2, 320–324 (1948). Quoted and translated in D. Howard, “Holism, separability and the metaphysical implications of the Bell experiments,” in Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory, J. T. Cushing and E. McMullin, eds. (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1989), p. 233
Fine A. (1982). “Correlations and physical locality”. In: Asquith P., Giere R (eds). PSA 1980 vol 2. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI, pp. 535–562
Fine A. (1982). “Hidden variables, joint probability and the Bell inequalities”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 48:291–295
Fine A. (1982). “Antinomies of entanglement; the puzzling case of the tangled statistics”. J. Philos. 79:733-747
Gleason A.M. (1957). “Measures on the closed subspaces of Hilbert space”. J. Math. Mech. 6: 885–893
Kochen S. and Specker E.P. (1967). “The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics”. J. Math. Mech. 17:59–87
Malley J.D. (1998). “Quantum conditional probability and hidden-variables models”. Phys. Rev A 58:812
Malley J.D. (2004). “All quantum observables in a hidden-variables model must commute simultaneously”. Phys. Rev. A 69:022118
J. D. Malley, “All quantum observables in a hidden-variables model must commute simultaneously,” http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402126.
J. D. Malley and A. Fine, “Noncommuting observables and local realism,” http://arxiv. org/abs/quant-ph/0505016.
E. Santos, “Bell’s theorem and the experiments: increasing support to local realism?,” fothcoming in Studies in History and Philosophy of Physics; available at http://arxiv.org/ abs/quant-ph/0410193 (references here are to this version).
Wigner E.P. (1970). Am. J. Phys 38:1005–1009
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stairs, A., Bub, J. Local Realism and Conditional Probability. Found Phys 36, 585–601 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-005-9031-y
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-005-9031-y
Keywords
- Bell’s inequality
- local realism
- hidden variables
- nonlocality
- Kochen–Specker theorem
- quantum conditional probability