dorsal/arxiv
View SchemaSubtraction of ``accidentals'' and the validity of Bell tests
| Authors | Caroline H. Thompson |
|---|---|
| Categories | |
| ArXiv ID | quant-ph/9903066 |
| URL | https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9903066 |
Abstract
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.
{
"annotation_id": "ef63b2fe-207c-4cfd-a7c3-2e5902a11553",
"date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:44.851000Z",
"date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:44.851000Z",
"file_hash": "201df5147103929c4e2439568f138b1b58745826843077bc6138ddc3e1d28f78",
"private": false,
"record": {
"abstract": "In some key Bell experiments, including two of the well-known ones by Alain\nAspect, 1981-2, it is only after the subtraction of ``accidentals\u0027\u0027 from the\ncoincidence counts that we get violations of Bell tests. The data adjustment,\nproducing increases of up to 60% in the test statistics, has never been\nadequately justified. Few published experiments give sufficient information for\nthe reader to make a fair assessment. There is a straightforward and well known\nrealist model that fits the unadjusted data very well. In this paper, the logic\nof this realist model and the reasoning used by experimenters in justification\nof the data adjustment are discussed. It is concluded that the evidence from\nall Bell experiments is in urgent need of re-assessment, in the light of all\nthe known ``loopholes\u0027\u0027. Invalid Bell tests have frequently been used,\nneglecting improved ones derived by Clauser and Horne in 1974. ``Local causal\u0027\u0027\nexplanations for the observations have been wrongfully neglected.",
"arxiv_id": "quant-ph/9903066",
"authors": [
"Caroline H. Thompson"
],
"categories": [
"quant-ph"
],
"title": "Subtraction of ``accidentals\u0027\u0027 and the validity of Bell tests",
"url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9903066"
},
"schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
"source": {
"execution_id": "a025a07e-9b91-410d-9fc4-b3c0ca080ab7",
"id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
"type": "Model",
"variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
"version": "0.1.0"
},
"user_id": 1000002
}