You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
On Superdeterministic Rejections of Settings Independence
arXiv
Authors: G. S. Ciepielewski, E. Okon, D. Sudarsky
Year
2020
Paper ID
21758
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
156
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Relying on some auxiliary assumptions, usually considered mild, Bell's theorem proves that no local theory can reproduce all the predictions of quantum mechanics. In this work, we introduce a fully local, superdeterministic model that, by explicitly violating settings independence--one of these auxiliary assumptions, requiring statistical independence between measurement settings and systems to be measured--is able to reproduce all the predictions of quantum mechanics. Moreover, we show that, contrary to widespread expectations, our model can break settings independence without an initial state that is too complex to handle, without visibly losing all explanatory power and without outright nullifying all of experimental science. Still, we argue that our model is unnecessarily complicated and does not offer true advantages over its non-local competitors. We conclude that, while our model does not appear to be a viable contender to their non-local counterparts, it provides the ideal framework to advance the debate over violations of statistical independence via the superdeterministic route.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Relying on some auxiliary assumptions, usually considered mild, Bell's theorem proves that no local theory can reproduce all the predictions of quantum mechanics.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.