Does the Bell Inequality Hold for All Local Theories ?
The claim that the Bell inequality D(a,b)≦ 2 is valid for all local theories is criticised. The criticism is based on the author’s proof that this universality claim is incompatible with the conservation law of angular momentum. There exists an infinity of counterexamples to the universality claim made for D(a,b)≦2. So, Bell offers no valid proof of the non-locality of the quantum formalism; consequently the experiments culminating in the Aspect experiment with the switches cannot be said to refute Einsteinian locality.
KeywordsAngular Momentum Total Angular Momentum Local Theory Bell Inequality Quantum Formalism
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.M. Jammer, The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (John Wiley, New York, 1974 ), pp. 115–119, 307.Google Scholar
- 3.K.R. Popper, Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (Hutchinson, London, 1982 and Rowan and Littlefield, Totowa, New Jersey, 1982 ), pp. 20–22.Google Scholar
- 4.J.S. Bell, Physics (N.Y.) 1, 195 (1964).Google Scholar
- 5.J.S. Bell, in Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, B. d’Espagnat, ed., ( Academic Press, New York, 1971 ), p. 178.Google Scholar
- 6.A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47 460 (1981); Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91 (1982).Google Scholar
- 8.J.S. Bell, private communication (23 June, 1982); Bell’s own explicit universality claim, namely that “Bell’s theorem is valid for arbitrary p(A),” clearly shows that Bell has not specified any particular class to which the functions (p,A,B) have to belong. In other words, the class to which (p,A,B) belong is assumed by Bell to be arbitrary.Google Scholar
- 9.K.R. Popper, private communication.Google Scholar
- 10.J.F. Clauser and M.A. Home, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974).Google Scholar
- 12.Th. D. Angelidis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1819 (1983).Google Scholar
- 13.R.D. Richtmyer, Principles of Advanced Mathematical Physics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1978 ), pp. 4–8, 21.Google Scholar
- 14.J.S. Bell, private communication (4 June, 1982 ).Google Scholar
- 17.V.B. Berestetskii, E.M. Lifshitz, and L.P. Pitaevskii, Rela¬tivistic Quantum Theory, Part 1 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1971 ), pp. 22, 47.Google Scholar
- 18.G. Backenstoss, B.D. Hyams, G. Knop, P.C. Marin, and U. Stier- lin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 6, 415 (1961); M. Bardon, P. Franzini, and J. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7_, 23, (1961).Google Scholar
- 19.Y., Choquet, C. Dewitt, and M. Dillard, Analysis, Manifolds and Physics ( North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977 ), p. 11.Google Scholar