Travis Norsen
Published 2006-07-07, updated 2006-11-16Version 2
We examine the prevalent use of the phrase ``local realism'' in the context of Bell's Theorem and associated experiments, with a focus on the question: what exactly is the `realism' in `local realism' supposed to mean? Carefully surveying several possible meanings, we argue that all of them are flawed in one way or another as attempts to point out a second premise (in addition to locality) on which the Bell inequalities rest, and (hence) which might be rejected in the face of empirical data violating the inequalities. We thus suggest that the phrase `local realism' should be banned from future discussions of these issues, and urge physicists to revisit the foundational questions behind Bell's Theorem.
Comments: Revised version, forthcoming in Foundations of Physics
Journal: Foundations of Physics, Vol. 37 No. 3, 311-340 (March 2007)
"Local Realism", Bell's Theorem and Quantum "Locally Realistic" Inequalities
Bell's theorem and the experiments: Increasing empirical support to local realism
Bell's theorem with and without inequalities for the three-qubit Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger and W states
