Physics – Quantum Physics
Scientific paper
1999-03-18
Physics
Quantum Physics
Section on Clauser and Horne's 1974 Bell test derivations corrected and extended. One ref added, and other minor improvements.
Scientific paper
In some key Bell experiments, including two of the well-known ones by Alain Aspect, 1981-2, it is only after the subtraction of ``accidentals'' from the coincidence counts that we get violations of Bell tests. The data adjustment, producing increases of up to 60% in the test statistics, has never been adequately justified. Few published experiments give sufficient information for the reader to make a fair assessment. There is a straightforward and well known realist model that fits the unadjusted data very well. In this paper, the logic of this realist model and the reasoning used by experimenters in justification of the data adjustment are discussed. It is concluded that the evidence from all Bell experiments is in urgent need of re-assessment, in the light of all the known ``loopholes''. Invalid Bell tests have frequently been used, neglecting improved ones derived by Clauser and Horne in 1974. ``Local causal'' explanations for the observations have been wrongfully neglected.
No associations
LandOfFree
Subtraction of ``accidentals'' and the validity of Bell tests does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Subtraction of ``accidentals'' and the validity of Bell tests, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Subtraction of ``accidentals'' and the validity of Bell tests will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-395038