Is Howard's separability principle a sufficient condition for outcome independence?

Abstract

Essay content differs substantially from presentation! In order to motivate his claim that the violation of the Bell inequalities forces us into a certain kind of holism, Howard develops a formal equivalence proof supposed to ground the stochastic “outcome independence” condition, the assumption of which is necessary for the derivation of the inequalities, in a physical principle, the separability principle. I will discuss several criticisms of Howard's equivalence proof that focus on the sufficiency of the separability principle for outcome independence. I will argue that, while none of these criticisms succeeds, they do constrain the possible form of Howard's argument.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-07

Downloads
46 (#1,255,469)

6 months
6 (#1,534,242)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Holism, Separability, and the Metaphysical Implications of the Bell Experiments.Don Howard - 1989 - In James T. Cushing & Ernan McMullin, Philoophical Consequences of Quantum Theory. University of Notre Dame Press. pp. 224--253.
Quantum Life: Interaction, Entanglement, and Separation.Eric Winsberg - 2003 - Journal of Philosophy 100 (2):80 - 97.
Aspects of Quantum Non-Locality I: Superluminal Signalling, Action-at-a-Distance, Non-Separability and Holism.Joseph Berkovitz - 1996 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 29 (2):183-222.

Add more references