dorsal/arxiv
View SchemaThe meaning of 'counterfactual' statements and non-locality in quantum mechanics
| Authors | T. C. Choy, Debra Ziegeler |
|---|---|
| Categories | |
| ArXiv ID | quant-ph/9907027 |
| URL | https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907027 |
Abstract
Recent discussions by Mermin [1] and Stapp [2] in this journal on non-locality and counterfactuality are shown to contain linguistic problems that require verification. As such they can at most provide us with two subjective choices for the meaning of 'counterfactual statements' in quantum mechanics. We shall show that the word 'counterfactual' is in fact inappropriate here and should be replaced by the word 'hypothetical'. Mermin's choice imposes a strictly contextual meaning based upon an interpretation of counterfactuality which he used to refute, without proof as we shall see, Stapp's logical proof [3] of non-locality in quantum theory. In linguistic theory both authors' choices of meaning: counterfactual versus hypothetical are equally acceptable and therefore some of the issues they discussed lie outside the domain of physics. The issues they discussed are further confused by the fact that in his reply Stapp [2] seems to have adopted Mermin's counterfactual interpretation against his own original [3] hypothetical interpretation. In the rest of this paper we shall adopt the hypothetical sense of Stapp's original statements but we modify his crucial statement LOC2 appropriately, then following his argumentations, we shall show that there is no conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics. We suggest that this should be the natural (pragmatic) choice of meaning in defining the predictions of events in the Hardy experiment.
{
"annotation_id": "487e03e9-a209-463a-b6c8-e3f678436cac",
"date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:48.588000Z",
"date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:48.588000Z",
"file_hash": "66fbfdb0323602b8122346348478d37277f6099b9092b6bb6893bc8d615e75fc",
"private": false,
"record": {
"abstract": "Recent discussions by Mermin [1] and Stapp [2] in this journal on\nnon-locality and counterfactuality are shown to contain linguistic problems\nthat require verification. As such they can at most provide us with two\nsubjective choices for the meaning of \u0027counterfactual statements\u0027 in quantum\nmechanics. We shall show that the word \u0027counterfactual\u0027 is in fact\ninappropriate here and should be replaced by the word \u0027hypothetical\u0027. Mermin\u0027s\nchoice imposes a strictly contextual meaning based upon an interpretation of\ncounterfactuality which he used to refute, without proof as we shall see,\nStapp\u0027s logical proof [3] of non-locality in quantum theory. In linguistic\ntheory both authors\u0027 choices of meaning: counterfactual versus hypothetical are\nequally acceptable and therefore some of the issues they discussed lie outside\nthe domain of physics. The issues they discussed are further confused by the\nfact that in his reply Stapp [2] seems to have adopted Mermin\u0027s counterfactual\ninterpretation against his own original [3] hypothetical interpretation. In the\nrest of this paper we shall adopt the hypothetical sense of Stapp\u0027s original\nstatements but we modify his crucial statement LOC2 appropriately, then\nfollowing his argumentations, we shall show that there is no conflict between\nrelativity and quantum mechanics. We suggest that this should be the natural\n(pragmatic) choice of meaning in defining the predictions of events in the\nHardy experiment.",
"arxiv_id": "quant-ph/9907027",
"authors": [
"T. C. Choy",
"Debra Ziegeler"
],
"categories": [
"quant-ph",
"physics.hist-ph"
],
"title": "The meaning of \u0027counterfactual\u0027 statements and non-locality in quantum mechanics",
"url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907027"
},
"schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
"source": {
"execution_id": "95eb00e1-ad32-433f-b9d3-e8caff0e7ebd",
"id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
"type": "Model",
"variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
"version": "0.1.0"
},
"user_id": 1000002
}