English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In a recent preprint Gill and Lambare, criticize our paper published inFrontiers in Physics. Their criticism is unfounded and misleading. They definea probabilistic coupling, in which BI-CHSH hold for all finite samples. It doesnot mean, that BI-CHSH hold in our model, in which four incompatibleexperiments are described by setting dependent random variables implemented on4 disjoint dedicated probability spaces. A joint probability distribution ofthese random variables does not exist and may not be used to deriveinequalities. Moreover, their probabilistic coupling is useless, for asubsequent contextual model, which we construct to describe final data fromBell tests and to explain, in a locally causal way, the reported violations ofinequalities and apparent violations of no-signaling. Neither quantumprobabilistic model of an ideal EPRB experiment nor local realistic andstochastic hidden variable models may explain reported non-signaling Therefore;it is obvious that our model extends the set of probability distributions ofpossible measurements allowed in the standard hidden variable models. Gill andLambare seem not understand , the main message of our paper, that the violationof BI-CHSH and Eberhard inequalities by finite samples in Bell Tests, no matterhow well these tests are designed and performed, does not allow for doubtregarding the existence of objective external physical reality and causallocality in Nature. Our contextual model does not want to circumvent BellTheorem. Therefore the title of Gill and Lambare paper and the conclusion:Kupczynski's escape route for local realism is not available are misleading andhave nothing to do with the content and conclusions of our paper.

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