The taliditl' d the r:onclu.sion to the nonlocality ti quantum ntechanic.s, accepted videlv today as the onlt' reasonahle solution to the EPR and Bell issues. i.s que.stioned und criticized. Arguntents are presented vt'hich remote the compelling character of this tonclusion and make tlear thut it is not the most obtious solutiott. Alternatit:e solutions are det:eloped y'ltich are lree of' the contradictions related v,ith the nonlocalitl'conclusion. Firstll'. the dependence on the udopted interpretalion i.s shovn. yt'ith the conclusion thot the alleged nonlocalitl propertv o.f the quantum.fbrmalism may harc been reached on the ba.sis of an interpretution Ihal is unnecessarily restrictiLe. Seconcllt', bt'ertending the cont:entional quantum formalism along the lines o/ Ludv'ig and Daies it is shoxl that the Bell problent may be related to tomplementuritt rather thun to nonlocality. Fiflull1,, 1fig depenclence on counterfiutuul reasoning is crititally exumined. It appear.s thot localitt, on the quantum letel muv still be retained prorided one oc('epts a netlt proposed principle o.f nonreproclucibility at the indiridual quantwn ler,el u.s an alternatiue o.f'quantum nonlocality. It i,s concluded that the locality printiple can retain its general uolidity, in.full conforntitv u,ith al! experimentul data.

The uniqueness of the Bohmian particle interpretation of the Kemmer equation, which describes massive spin-0 and spin-1 particles, is discussed. Recently the same problem for spin- case, there appears an additional spindependent term in the guidance equation in the spin-1 case. We also discuss the ambiguity associated with the introduction of an electromagnetic coupling in the Kemmer theory. We argue that when the minimal coupling is correctly introduced, then the current constructed from the energy-momentum tensor is no longer conserved. Hence this current can not serve as a particle probability four-vector.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract