Related papers: Reply to Werner
We find it absurd that Walliser [1] essentially used the same analysis and obtained identical results as reported in [3], yet arrived at different conclusions. Namely, based on an incomplete theory and using erroneous arguments, he not only…
I respond to the Bernard et al. comment on my letter ``Chiral anomalies and rooted staggered fermions.''
We respond to Stephen Adler's comments on our paper "The Free Will Theorem",and add some further observations.
Benenti et al. recently submitted a Comment (arXiv:0912.3667) on our work "Coherent Ratchets in Driven Bose-Einstein condensates". We show that the main claim of the Comment is wrong, and correct some other misunderstandings presented…
Bell's inequality has been derived several times from quite different basic assumptions, which imply different conclusions. This resulted into widespread confusion regarding the exact implications of the experimental violations of the…
A recent Comment [arXiv:0811.2790] on the Letter 'Quantum Bounce and Cosmic Recall' by the authors is shown to arise from an incorrect understanding of the issues at hand and of our analysis. The conclusions of Bojowald's Comment are shown…
I identify a number of errors in Richard Gill's purported refutation (arXiv:1203.1504) of my disproof of Bell's theorem. In particular, I point out that his central argument is based, not only on a rather trivial misreading of my…
Brukner and Pienaar have critiqued the Relational Quantum Mechanics of Rovelli, and together with Di Biagio, the latter has replied. I point out a few places where, in my view, that reply needs clarification.
This paper provides a systematic response to the criticisms raised by Jean-Marc Ginoux in response to my review of his book on the history of relativity. Whereas my review was written in a strictly academic manner, Ginoux's commentary…
We formally prove the existence of an enduring incongruence pervading a widespread interpretation of the Bell inequality and explain how to rationally avoid it with a natural assumption justified by explicit reference to a mathematical…
Invited contribution to Annalen der Physik (Expert Opinion).
A recent rebuttal to criticism of Bell's analysis is shown to be defective by fault of failure to consider all hypothetical conditions input into the derivation of Bell Inequalitites.
In this communication we refute a criticism concerning results of our work [3] that was presented in references [1] and [2].
The Comment by Duval et al. [PRL 96, 099701 (2006)] addresses an important, but not the main, result of our Letter [PRL 95, 137204 (2005)]. It does not contradict our results in substance, and the only objection is really on the style of…
Recently R. G. Newton published a comment criticizing the methods and the results of a paper published by the author. His criticism touches on a few key points of the subject and hence deserves a detailed reply. Here is the reply, point by…
Recent work on Bohr's reply to EPR has helped improve our understanding of Bohr's reply, but further work is needed. In this paper I do two things towards that end. First, I make some elementary points about EPR's argument, which help to…
Mermin states in a recent paper that his nontechnical version of Bell's theorem stands and is not invalidated by time and setting dependent instrument parameters as claimed in one of our previous papers. We identify a number of…
The summary of the Author's results on Bell inequalities and macroscopic entanglement.
The authors of the Comment ascribe us claims never made while moderating their own previous unsubstantiated statements.
In a series of recent papers (quant-ph/0703179, quant-ph/0703244, arXiv:0707.1333) Joy Christian claims to have "disproved Bell's theorem". Though his work is certainly intellectually stimulating, we argue below that his main claim is…