Comment on 'Non-realism: deep thought or soft option?', by N. Gisin
arXiv:0909.0015
Abstract
It is briefly demonstrated that Gisin's so-called 'locality' assumption [arXiv:0901.4255] is in fact equivalent to the existence of a local deterministic model. Thus, despite Gisin's suggestions to the contrary, 'local realism' in the sense of Bell is built into his argument from the very beginning. His 'locality' assumption may more appropriately be labelled 'separability'. It is further noted that the increasingly popular term 'quantum nonlocality' is not only misleading, but tends to obscure the important distinction between no-signalling and separability. In particular, 'local non-realism' remains firmly in place as a hard option for interpreting Bell inequality violations. Other options are briefly speculated on.
v2: minor clarifications in light of comments by N Gisin and others, 3 refs added; v3: subtleties of separability, 2 refs added