A Note on Bell's Theorem Logical Consistency

Abstract

Counterfactual definiteness is supposed to underlie the Bell theorem. An old controversy exists among those who reject the theorem implications by rejecting counterfactual definiteness and those who claim that, since it is a direct consequence of locality, it cannot be independently rejected. We propose a different approach for solving this contentious issue by realizing that counterfactual definiteness is an unnecessary and inconsistent assumption. Counterfactual definiteness is not equivalent to realism or determinism neither it follows from locality. It merely reduces to an incongruent application of counterfactual reasoning. Being incompatible with falsifiability, it constitutes an unjustified assumption that goes against the scientific method's rigor. Correct formulations of the Bell theorem's bases show it is absent either as a fundamental hypothesis or as a consequence of something else. Most importantly, we present a coherent Bell inequality derivation carefully devised to show explicitly and convincingly the absence of incompatible experiments or counterfactual reasoning. Thus, even admitting that counterfactual definiteness could be a consistent assumption, the necessary conclusion is that it is irrelevant for the inequality formulation and can be safely ignored when discussing Bell's inequality philosophical and physical implications.

References in corpus (21)

• Loopholes in Bell Inequality Tests of Local Realism
• Bell's Theorem and Locally-Mediated Reformulations of Quantum Mechanics
• Against `Realism'
• Statistics, Causality and Bell's Theorem
• Nonlocality Claims are Inconsistent with Hilbert Space Quantum Mechanics
• Quantum non-locality - It ain't necessarily so...
• Making Sense of Bell's Theorem and Quantum Nonlocality
• Getting rid of nonlocality from quantum physics
• Quantum correlations are weaved by the spinors of the Euclidean primitives
• Where Bell went wrong
• Bell's Theorem Versus Local Realism in a Quaternionic Model of Physical Space
• Is the Moon there if nobody looks: Bell Inequalities and Physical Reality
• The EPR paradox, Bell's inequality, and the question of locality
• Non-Locality Without Counterfactual Reasoning
• Entanglement and Quantum Nonlocality Demystified
• Homer nodded: von Neumann's surprising oversight
• Bell inequalities, Counterfactual Definiteness and Falsifiability
• A Refutation of Bell's Theorem
• A loophole of all `loophole-free' Bell-type theorems
• Comment on "A Loophole of All "Loophole-Free" Bell-Type Theorems"
• Does locality plus perfect correlation imply determinism?

Cited by in corpus (8)

• Contextuality or nonlocality; what would John Bell choose today?
• Bell inequalities, Counterfactual Definiteness and Falsifiability
• Counterfactual restrictions and Bell's theorem
• Commentary: Is the moon there if nobody looks -- Bell inequalities and physical reality
• Response: Commentary: Is the moon there if nobody looks? Bell inequalities and physical reality
• Comment on "Nonlocality claims are inconsistent with Hilbert-space quantum mechanics"
• Inequality-free proof of Bell's theorem
• Counterfactual quantum measurements