Can we close the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate?

TL;DR

This paper presents a locally causal probabilistic model that explains quantum correlations without nonlocality, challenging the common interpretation of Bell inequality violations and suggesting the Bohr-Einstein debate remains open.

Contribution

It introduces a simple probabilistic model incorporating setting-dependent parameters, showing Bell violations do not imply nonlocality or the incompleteness of quantum theory.

Findings

Bell inequalities can be violated in a locally causal model

Measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor fully random

The debate on quantum nonlocality remains unresolved

Abstract

Recent experiments allowed concluding that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated thus it is important to understand what it means and how can we explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that: Einstein was wrong, Nature is nonlocal and nonlocal correlations are produced due to the quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space time? Fortunately such conclusions are unfounded because if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model then Bell-type inequalities may not be proven .We construct a simple probabilistic model explaining these correlations in a locally causal way. In our model measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in irreducibly random way. We explain in detail why, contrary to the general belief; an introduction of setting dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters' freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow concluding that Nature is nonlocal and that quantum theory is complete thus the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is not only important for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena.