Primary Menu Search
  • Aims & Scope
  • Editorial Board
  • Content
  • Book Reviews
  • Supplement
  • Members
  • Submit
  • Contact IJQF

International Journal of Quantum Foundations

An online forum for exploring the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics, quantum field theory and quantum gravity

You are here: Home ∼ Are there really two different Bell’s theorems?

Are there really two different Bell’s theorems?

Published by International Journal of Quantum Foundations on March 21, 2015 | 1 Response

Volume 1, Issue 2, pages 65-84

Travis Norsen [Show Biography]

After double-majoring in physics and philosophy at Harvey Mudd College (Claremont, CA), in 2002 I earned a PhD in theoretical nuclear astrophysics from the University of Washington in Seattle. Since then I have worked primarily as a physics teacher and curriculum developer at a number of colleges and universities. I have also published extensively on such perennial foundational issues as Bell’s theorem, the EPR argument, and alternatives to orthodox QM such as the de Broglie – Bohm pilot-wave theory. In addition to teaching and writing I enjoy gardening, cooking, and playing soccer and ultimate frisbee.

This is a polemical response to Howard Wiseman’s recent paper, “The two Bell’s theorems of John Bell”. Wiseman argues that, in 1964, Bell established a conflict between the quantum mechanical predictions and the joint assumptions of determinism and (what is now usually known as) “parameter independence”. Only later, in 1976, did Bell, according to Wiseman, first establish a conflict between the quantum mechanical predictions and locality alone (in the specific form that Bell would sometimes call “local causality”). Thus, according to Wiseman, the long-standing disagreements about what, exactly, Bell’s theorem does and does not prove can be understood largely as miscommunications resulting from the fact that there are really two quite distinct “Bell’s theorems”. My goal here is to lay out what Wiseman briefly describes as an “alternate reading” of Bell’s 1964 paper, according to which (quoting Wiseman here) “the first paragraph of Bell’s ‘Formulation’ section [should be seen] as an essential part of his 1964 theorem, the first part of a two-part argument.” I will argue in particular that this “alternate reading” is the correct way to understand Bell’s 1964 paper and that Wiseman’s reading is strongly inconsistent with the available evidence.

Full Text Download (202k) | View Open Review

Posted in Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2015 Tagged Original Paper

Article written by International Journal of Quantum Foundations

International Journal of Quantum Foundations

← Previous Next →

Latest Issues

  • Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2022
  • Volume 8, Issue 2, April 2022
  • Volume 8, Issue 3, July 2022
  • Volume 8, Issue 4, October 2022
  • Volume 9, Issue 1, January 2023

IJQF Supplement

  • Volume 4, Issue 1, April 2022
  • Volume 4, Issue 2, July 2022
  • Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2023

IJQF Members

Newest | Active | Popular
  • Profile picture of Sheldon Goldstein
    Sheldon Goldstein
    active 21 hours, 19 minutes ago
  • Profile picture of Lajos Diósi
    Lajos Diósi
    active 21 hours, 19 minutes ago
  • Profile picture of Roger Penrose
    Roger Penrose
    active 21 hours, 19 minutes ago
  • Profile picture of Arthur Fine
    Arthur Fine
    active 21 hours, 19 minutes ago
  • Profile picture of Andrew Whitaker
    Andrew Whitaker
    active 2 days, 12 hours ago

IJQF Forums

Newest | Active | Popular | Alphabetical
  • Group logo of 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell’s theorem
    2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell’s theorem
    active 1 month, 3 weeks ago
  • Group logo of 2018 Workshop on Wigner’s Friend
    2018 Workshop on Wigner’s Friend
    active 3 years, 6 months ago
  • Group logo of 2016 International Workshop on Quantum Observers
    2016 International Workshop on Quantum Observers
    active 3 years, 10 months ago
  • Group logo of 2015 International Workshop on Quantum Foundations
    2015 International Workshop on Quantum Foundations
    active 4 years, 6 months ago
  • Group logo of John Bell Workshop 2014
    John Bell Workshop 2014
    active 5 years ago
  • Group logo of 2017 International Workshop: Collapse of the Wave Function
    2017 International Workshop: Collapse of the Wave Function
    active 5 years ago

Most Viewed

  • On Testing the Simulation Theory (15,757)
  • 2019 International Workshop: Beyond Bell’s theorem (3,282)
  • Latest Papers on Quantum Foundations (1,937)
  • Non-Relativistic Limit of the Dirac Equation (1,578)
  • OBITUARY FOR HEINZ-DIETER ZEH (1932 — 2018) (1,564)
  • International Journal of Quantum Foundations (1,324)
  • Review of “Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: An Exploration of the Physical Meaning of Quantum Theory” (1,139)
  • Taking Heisenberg’s Potentia Seriously (1,020)
  • The Meaning of the Wave Function: In Search of the Ontology of Quantum Mechanics (911)
  • On testing the simulation hypothesis (878)

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Primary Menu

  • Aims & Scope
  • Editorial Board
  • Content
  • Book Reviews
  • Supplement
  • Members
  • Submit
  • Contact IJQF

Copyright © 2023 International Journal of Quantum Foundations.

Powered by WordPress and Path. Back to Top