Comments on "Disproof of Bell's theorem"

TL;DR

This paper discusses Joy Christian's counterexample to Bell's theorem, analyzing its assumptions, physical relevance, and implications, while noting subsequent disproof of its mathematical consistency.

Contribution

It critically examines the assumptions and implications of Christian's counterexample, clarifying its impact on the understanding of Bell's theorem.

Findings

Christian's model is a contextual hidden variable theory

The counterexample aligns with Bell's theorem if contextuality is accepted

Subsequent analysis disproved the mathematical validity of Christian's model

Abstract

In a series of very interesting papers [1-7], Joy Christian constructed a counterexample to Bell's theorem. This counterexample does not have the same assumptions as the original Bell's theorem, and therefore it does not represent a genuine disproof in a strict mathematical sense. However, assuming the physical relevance of the new assumptions, the counterexample is shown to be a contextual hidden variable theory. If Bell's theorem's importance is to rule out contextual hidden variable theories obeying relativistic locality, then Joy Christian's counterexample achieves its aim. If however contextual hidden variables theories are not considered genuine physically theories and Bell's theorem's importance stems from its ability to be experimentally confirmed, then Joy Christian's counterexample does not diminish the importance of Bell's theorem. The implications of Joy Christian's counterexample are discussed in the context of information theory. Version 2 note: Subsequent analysis disproved the mathematical consistency of Joy Christian's model. This paper was based on the assumption of the mathematical validity of the model. Except for the addition of this note, the content of this paper was not modified in any other way.