Non-local Realistic Theories and the Scope of the Bell Theorem

TL;DR

This paper argues that the Bell theorem is often misinterpreted as ruling out all forms of realism, but it actually does not address the specific notion of realism used by some recent proposals, thus challenging their conclusions.

Contribution

The paper clarifies the distinction between the Bell theorem and the concept of realism, showing that the theorem does not directly refute non-local realistic theories as claimed by some recent authors.

Findings

Bell theorem does not directly address the 'realism' defined by recent proposals.

Recent claims that Bell rules out all forms of realism are unjustified.

The paper clarifies the foundational significance of the Bell theorem.

Abstract

According to a widespread view, the Bell theorem establishes the untenability of so-called 'local realism'. On the basis of this view, recent proposals by Leggett, Zeilinger and others have been developed according to which it can be proved that even some non-local realistic theories have to be ruled out. As a consequence, within this view the Bell theorem allows one to establish that no reasonable form of realism, be it local or non-local, can be made compatible with the (experimentally tested) predictions of quantum mechanics. In the present paper it is argued that the Bell theorem has demonstrably nothing to do with the 'realism' as defined by these authors and that, as a consequence, their conclusions about the foundational significance of the Bell theorem are unjustified.