Commentary: Is the moon there if nobody looks -- Bell inequalities and physical reality

量子纠缠，公平采样和现实：当没有人看的时候，月亮在那里吗？

Quantum entanglement, fair sampling, and reality: Is the moon there when nobody looks?

1981年，大卫·默明（David Mermin）描述了贝尔定理的一个巧妙的简化版本。它以一种直截了当的方式指出，从局域实在论的角度解释纠缠可能是有问题的。我在这里提出了一个扩展版本的Mermin的设备，实际上可以通过样本选择偏差给出一个简单的本地现实主义解释，我认为我们仍然没有科学理由相信月球可能不存在，当没有人看。

关于《没人看时月亮是否存在？贝尔不等式与物理实在》的进一步评论

Further comments on "Is the moon there if nobody looks? Bell inequalities and physical reality"

针对Kupczynski关于贝尔实验的“默认语境性”模型及相关学术争议，本文论证该模型最新版本对贝尔类实验结果统计无约束，实则允许任意非定域性。

Response: Commentary: Is the moon there if nobody looks? Bell inequalities and physical reality

We reject unjustified criticism of our published article [2209.07992] by Gill and Lambare [arXiv:2211.02481, arXiv:2208.09930]. They completely misinterpret the content and conclusions of this article. They construct a counterfactual probabilistic model in which random variables representing outcomes of four experiments performed using incompatible experimental settings are jointly distributed. Thus, CHSH inequalities trivially hold for all finite samples generated by their model. Their model defines a probabilistic coupling for our model describing only the raw data from Bell tests. The exist…

Is the Moon there if nobody looks: Bell Inequalities and Physical Reality

Various Bell inequalities are trivial algebraic properties satisfied by each line of particular data spreadsheets.It is surprising that their violation in some experiments, allows to speculate about the existence of nonlocal influences in Nature and to doubt the existence of the objective external physical reality. Such speculations are rooted in incorrect interpretations of quantum mechanics and in a failure of local realistic hidden variable models to reproduce quantum predictions for spin polarisation correlation experiments. These hidden variable models use counterfactual joint probability…

Is the Moon there if nobody looks: A reply to Gill and Lambare

In a recent preprint Gill and Lambare, criticize our paper published in Frontiers in Physics. Their criticism is unfounded and misleading. They define a probabilistic coupling, in which BI-CHSH hold for all finite samples. It does not mean, that BI-CHSH hold in our model, in which four incompatible experiments are described by setting dependent random variables implemented on 4 disjoint dedicated probability spaces. A joint probability distribution of these random variables does not exist and may not be used to derive inequalities. Moreover, their probabilistic coupling is useless, for a subse…