[Paper Review] Get rid of nonlocality from quantum physics

Andrei Khrennikov|arXiv (Cornell University)|Jul 5, 2019

Quantum Mechanics and Applications14 citations

TL;DR

This paper argues that quantum nonlocality, as inferred from Bell inequality violations, is not a genuine physical nonlocality but rather a statistical manifestation of the incompatibility of quantum observables, aligning with Bohr's complementarity principle. The authors contend that the term 'nonlocality' is misleading and should be abandoned in quantum physics, as it misrepresents the true nature of quantum complementarity and the EPR paradox.

ABSTRACT

We demonstrate that the tests on violation of the Bell type inequalities are simply statistical tests of local incompatibility of observables. In fact, these are tests on violation of {\it Bohr's complementarity principle.} This conclusion matches perfectly with the original EPR-argument which was directed against the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Thus the use of the terminology nonlocality is really misleading. In quantum theory there is no place for it. It has to be get rid of quantum physics.

Motivation & Objective

• To challenge the interpretation of Bell inequality violations as evidence of quantum nonlocality.
• To reframe these tests as statistical validations of observable incompatibility.
• To reassert Bohr's complementarity principle as the correct conceptual framework.
• To argue that the term 'nonlocality' misrepresents quantum theory and should be removed from quantum physics.

Proposed method

• Analyzes Bell-type inequality tests as statistical assessments of observable incompatibility.
• Reinterprets the EPR argument not as a challenge to locality but to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
• Applies Bohr's complementarity principle to reinterpret quantum measurement outcomes.
• Uses logical and conceptual analysis to show that nonlocality is a misnomer in quantum foundations.
• Demonstrates that the observed violations stem from the mutual exclusivity of quantum observables, not nonlocal influences.
• Argues that the terminology 'nonlocality' obscures the true quantum principle at play: complementarity.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 Is the violation of Bell inequalities truly evidence of nonlocality in quantum mechanics?
• RQ2 How does the EPR argument relate to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle rather than locality?
• RQ3 Can the observed correlations in Bell tests be explained without invoking nonlocality?
• RQ4 Why is the term 'nonlocality' misleading in quantum foundations?
• RQ5 What is the correct conceptual framework for understanding quantum measurement incompatibility?

Key findings

• Bell inequality violations are not evidence of nonlocality but statistical tests of observable incompatibility.
• The EPR argument is fundamentally directed against the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, not locality.
• Bohr's complementarity principle provides the correct conceptual basis for interpreting these tests.
• The term 'nonlocality' is misleading and should be removed from quantum physics.
• Quantum mechanics does not contain nonlocality; the phenomenon is a misinterpretation of complementarity.
• The observed correlations arise from the incompatibility of quantum observables, not from nonlocal influences.