Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Foundations
Another Triumph of Locality: Colliding Histories Skew Handshakes
arXiv
Authors: Charles Alexandre Bédard
Year
2026
Paper ID
45550
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
117
Citations
N/A
Abstract
From gravity to electromagnetism, apparent action at a distance has always been resolved by deeper, local explanations. Yet today, Bell's theorem is widely interpreted as the death knell for local reality. In this chapter, I present the theorem in accessible terms, examine the three main strategies that attempt to preserve hidden variables, and argue that they share a common defect: the attempt to explain the quantum from the classical rather than the other way around. In unitary quantum mechanics, classicality itself is given a quantum account, and, when the Bell scenario is formulated in the Heisenberg picture, a strictly local explanation emerges. This chapter serves as a non-technical front-end to 'Explaining Bell Locally' (Proc. R. Soc. A).
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- From gravity to electromagnetism, apparent action at a distance has always been resolved by deeper, local explanations.
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.