Related papers: Reply to Werner

I present my encounter with John Bell at CERN, our collaboration and joint work in particle physics. I also will recall our quantum debates and give my personal view on Bell's fundamental work on quantum theory, in particular, on…

This article is intended as a compendium and guide to the variety of Bell Inequality derivations that have appeared in the literature in recent years, classifying them into six broad categories, revealing the underlying, often hidden,…

The aim of the paper is to show that L. Friedlander's results on the relation between Dirichlet and Neumann counting functions (Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 116, 1991) remain valid in abstract setting.

We assert that the reported results consitute an empirical counterexample to Bell's theorem

In this manuscript the authors present a detailed answer to the comment in order to avoid misunderstandings in the future.

We analyze foundational consequences of recently announced loophole free tests of violation of Bell's inequality. We consider two interpretations of these remarkable experiments. By the conventional one "Einstein was wrong and Bohr was…

The Bell experiment is discussed in the light of a new approach to the foundation of quantum mechanics. It is concluded from the basic model that the mind of any observer must be limited in some way: In certain contexts, he is simply not…

In a recent article (Found Sci (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09666-0) Marek Czachor claims that the Bell inequality cannot be proved because variables of complementary measurements cannot be added or multiplied. Even though he…

Comment on Article by Ferreira and Gamerman [arXiv:1509.03410].

Comment on Article by Ferreira and Gamerman [arXiv:1509.03410].

In my commentary, I will argue that the conclusions drawn in the paper "Noncommutative causality in algebraic quantum field" theory by G\'abor Hofer-Szab\'o (and similar publications) are incorrect. As proven by J.S. Bell, a local common…

We remark on the validity of the concerns raised in the comment(cond-mat/0304626) by Fal'ko, Lerner, Tsyplyatyev, and Aleiner..

A disagreement of the empirical results with quantum mechanical predictions is pointed out in the experiment by B. G. Christensen et al. The anomaly is quite similar to one present in the analogous experiment by M. Giustina et al.…

This paper has been withdrawn by the author due to an error in section 7. There is a new version: arXiv:1011.3352.

We point out a mistake in the statement of Corollary 2 in R. C. Alperin's paper on Selberg's lemma.

This paper has been withdrawn because it is superseded by quant-ph/9905084 "Bayesian analysis of Bell inequalities.

Withdrawn -- a revised version will appear in due course.

This work is a continuation of what was done in a previous paper and strongly connected to the recent work of U. Abel and I. Rasa [arXiv:1707.00127]

In an article published in 2010, Kiukas and Werner claim to have shown that Bohmian Mechanics does not make the same empirical predictions as ordinary Quantum Mechanics. We explain that such claim is wrong.

In the Comment [Eur. J. Phys., to be published] on our paper [Eur. J. Phys. 19 (1998) 1-6], the author declares that we claim that the ratio of inertial mass to gravitational mass can be derived ex nihilo and that our paper was published…