Abstract
L. Vervoort claims to have found a model which “can violate the Bell inequality and reproduce the quantum statistics, even if it is based on local dynamics only”. This claim is false. The proposed model contains global elements. The physics behind the model is local, but would not allow the explanation of violations of Bell inequalities for space-like separated events, if superluminal causal influences are forbidden. To use it for this purpose, one has to introduce a preferred frame where information can be send faster than light. As a cause of the misunderstanding we identify the unfortunate convention to use “local” as a synonym for Einstein-local, so that theories which are local in every physically relevant sense have to be named “non-local”, and argue that this convention should be abandoned.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
To classify the actual convention as “Orwellian” is justified not only because it requires to name a local theory non-local. It also shares another important aspect with newspeak —it leaves some incorrect thoughts without words to talk about then: indeed, the word “local” is the natural word to describe the class of models considered in this paper, with some much higher speed of information transfer in a hidden preferred frame, and to distinguish it from theories with really pathological locality and causality violations. And this is, indeed, a class of theories which is the closest thing to anathema in modern physics.
This class cannot be rejected as so unimportant that it is not even worth to be named adequately. It actually contains viable theories of gravity [7, 8] as well as proposals for high energy physics beyond the standard model [9] and is clearly important for discussions of realistic or causal interpretations of quantum theory and the violations of Bell’s inequalities.
References
Vervoort, L.: No-Go theorems face background-based theories for quantum mechanics. Found. Phys. 46, 458–472 (2016). arXiv:1406.0901
Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics 1, 195–200 (1964)
A. Einstein. In: Schilp, P.A. (ed.) Albert Einstein, Philosopher Scientist, p. 85. Library of Living Philosophers, Evanston (1949)
Gröblacher, S., Paterek, T., Kaltenbaek, R., Brukner, Č., Żukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., Zeilinger, A.: An experimental test of non-local realism. Nature 446, 871–875 (2007). arXiv:0704.2529
Wittmann, B., Ramelow, S., Steinlechner, F., Langford, N.K., Brunner, N., Wiseman, H.M., Ursin, R., Zeilinger, A.: Loophole-free Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment via quantum steering. New J. Phys. 14, 053030 (2012). arXiv:1111.0760
Salart, D., Baas, A., Branciard, C., Gisin, N., Zbinden, H.: Testing spooky action at a distance. Nature 454, 861–864 (2008). arXiv:0808.3316
Jacobson, T., Mattingly, D.: Gravity with a dynamical preferred frame. Phys. Rev. D 64, 024028 (2001). arXiv:gr-qc/0007031
Schmelzer, I.: A generalization of the Lorentz ether to gravity with general-relativistic limit. Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras 22(1), 203–242 (2012). arXiv:gr-qc/0205035
Schmelzer, I.: A condensed matter interpretation of SM fermions and gauge fields. Found. Phys. 39(1), 73–107 (2009). arXiv:0908.0591
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schmelzer, I. About a “Nonlocal” Local Model Considered by L. Vervoort, and the Necessity to Distinguish Locality from Einstein Locality. Found Phys 47, 113–116 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-016-0046-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-016-0046-3