论文标题
情境性或非局部性；约翰·贝尔今天会选择什么？
Contextuality or nonlocality; what would John Bell choose today?
论文作者
论文摘要
违反贝尔·奇什（Bell-Chsh）的不平等现象并不能证明对量子非本地性，阴谋和复古因素的猜测是合理的。这样的猜测植根于一种信念，即在概率模型中设定隐藏变量的依赖，称为违反测量独立性，将意味着违反了实验者的选择自由。这种信念是没有根据的，因为它是基于对贝叶斯定理的可疑使用和条件概率的不正确的因果解释。在Bell-Local逼真的模型中，隐藏变量仅描述由源创建的光子光束，因此它们不能依赖于随机选择的实验设置。但是，如果将描述测量工具的隐藏变量正确地纳入上下文概率模型中，则可以在不引起量子非局部性的情况下解释贝尔测试中报告的不平等现象，并且明显违反了贝尔测试中报告的无信号。因此，对我们而言，违反贝尔 - 奇什的不平等现象仅证明了隐藏的变量必须依赖于确认量子可观察到的上下文特征的设置，并且通过测量仪器扮演的积极作用。贝尔认为他必须在非局部和违反实验者选择自由之间进行选择。他从两个不好的选择中选择了非局部性。今天，他可能会选择违反被理解为情境性的统计独立性的行为。
A violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities does not justify speculations about quantum non-locality, conspiracy and retro-causation. Such speculations are rooted in a belief that setting dependence of hidden variables in a probabilistic model, called a violation of measurement independence, would mean a violation of experimenters freedom of choice. This belief is unfounded because it is based on a questionable use of Bayes Theorem and on incorrect causal interpretation of conditional probabilities. In Bell-local realistic model, hidden variables describe only photonic beams created by a source, thus they cannot depend on randomly chosen experimental settings. However, if hidden variables describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated into a contextual probabilistic model a violation of inequalities and an apparent violation of no-signaling reported in Bell tests can be explained without evoking quantum nonlocality. Therefore, for us, a violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities proves only that hidden variables have to depend on settings confirming contextual character of quantum observables and an active role played by measuring instruments. Bell thought that he had to choose between nonlocality and the violation of experimenters freedom of choice. From two bad choices he chose nonlocality. Today he would probably choose the violation of statistical independence understood as contextuality.
