Reply to a comment of I. Schmelzer

TL;DR

This paper refutes Schmelzer's claims about passive locality and demonstrates that the Fritsche-Haugk theory can define a local hidden variable model for the singlet state, correcting errors in the author's previous work.

Contribution

It clarifies the relationship between passive locality and EPR completeness and defends the validity of the Fritsche-Haugk theory as a local hidden variable model.

Findings

Passive locality does not imply EPR completeness.

The Fritsche-Haugk theory can model the singlet state locally.

Errors in the author's previous paper are identified and corrected.

Abstract

This is a reply to the comment of Schmelzer on my earlier paper. In contrast to Schmelzer's claims, it is shown that passive locality does not correspond to the completeness condition of EPR. Nevertheless, it is argued that Schmelzer has found several errors in my article which, fortunately, can be corrected. In spite of Schmelzer's arguments, the Fritsche-Haugk theory can be used to define a local hidden variable theory for the singlet state.