Statistics, Causality and Bell's Theorem
Richard D. Gill

TL;DR
This paper links Bell's theorem to causality and statistical principles, providing a finite sample proof and arguing that experimental violations challenge realism rather than locality.
Contribution
It offers a strong, finite sample version of Bell's inequality and clarifies the statistical assumptions underlying Bell tests and their implications for realism and locality.
Findings
Bell's theorem is incompatible with locality, realism, and freedom.
Proper statistical analysis can avoid experimental loopholes.
Bell's theorem suggests abandoning realism, not locality.
Abstract
Bell's [Physics 1 (1964) 195-200] theorem is popularly supposed to establish the nonlocality of quantum physics. Violation of Bell's inequality in experiments such as that of Aspect, Dalibard and Roger [Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1804-1807] provides empirical proof of nonlocality in the real world. This paper reviews recent work on Bell's theorem, linking it to issues in causality as understood by statisticians. The paper starts with a proof of a strong, finite sample, version of Bell's inequality and thereby also of Bell's theorem, which states that quantum theory is incompatible with the conjunction of three formerly uncontroversial physical principles, here referred to as locality, realism and freedom. Locality is the principle that the direction of causality matches the direction of time, and that causal influences need time to propagate spatially. Realism and freedom are directly…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsQuantum Mechanics and Applications · Statistical Mechanics and Entropy · Philosophy and History of Science
