2017
DOI: 10.1515/phys-2017-0068
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rhetoric, logic, and experiment in the quantum nonlocality debate

Abstract: This paper argues that quantum nonlocality (QNL) has not been rigorously proven, despite the existence of recent Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments that are claimed to be 'loophole-free'. First, readers are alerted to rhetorical arguments, which are unfortunately often appealed to in the QNL debate, to empower readers to identify and reject such arguments. Second, logical problems in QNL proofs are described and exemplified by a discussion of the projection postulate problem. Third, experimental i… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 35 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2.1 above, both the predictions of quantum mechanics, and the data used to verify them, are in terms of events rather than systems. Some of the problems that can arise relate to unchallenged assumptions, incomplete analysis, insufficient statistics, incorrect statistical analyses, incomplete data (due to data discarding or postselection), spurious data (noise, dark counts, accidental counts) and corrupted data [362,363]. For example, one common assumption is fair sampling, meaning that the observed outcomes of detections faithfully reproduce the outcome statistics of all emissions.…”
Section: Bell Inequalities: Few Clear Implications From Experimental mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2.1 above, both the predictions of quantum mechanics, and the data used to verify them, are in terms of events rather than systems. Some of the problems that can arise relate to unchallenged assumptions, incomplete analysis, insufficient statistics, incorrect statistical analyses, incomplete data (due to data discarding or postselection), spurious data (noise, dark counts, accidental counts) and corrupted data [362,363]. For example, one common assumption is fair sampling, meaning that the observed outcomes of detections faithfully reproduce the outcome statistics of all emissions.…”
Section: Bell Inequalities: Few Clear Implications From Experimental mentioning
confidence: 99%