The aim of this study is to produce a simulation of EPR experiments violating the CHSH-Bell inequalities using physically interpretable objects (properties defined before measurement) and interactions (no supraliminal communication), without influence from any theory. It turns out that the proposed model systematically violates the CHSH-Bell inequalities reaching all the values ( 2 ≤ S ≤ 4 ) . Our simulation reproduces experimental entanglements with greater efficiency. This approach has at least two consequences. First, it demonstrates that violations of the CHSH-Bell inequalities are possible while still verifying the principles of realism and locality, but in a different sense from that of Bell’s theorem. Therefore, Bell’s theorem itself is not called into question, nor are the results of the EPR experiments. However, it is the deduction that leads to the current interpretation (often described as strange because it does not follow one of the principles of realism and locality as defined by Bell’s theorem) that is challenged. Second, it challenges real-world EPR experiments to exceed the efficiency rates of our simulation. Our idealization demonstrates that, between the efficiency rates required to confirm the violation of Bell’s inequalities and the efficiency rates of our idealization, the interpretation of experiments remains possible within a framework of “classical” physical principles (properties defined before measurement and no supraliminal communication). Confirming the strangeness of quantum mechanics would therefore require obtaining efficiency rates higher than those of Bell’s theorem.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Stéphane Le Corre
Frontiers in Physics
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Stéphane Le Corre (Wed,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69be36f76e48c4981c67634e — DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2026.1760244
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: