Santos replies
Open accessAbstract
hole.This wrong belief, not attributable to the paper of Clauser and Horne, has stooped the search for truly reliable experiments, and so it has delayed the solution of an extremely important open problem"by almost a quarter of a century.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In atomic-cascade sources, the entanglement is only perfect for photons that are emitted back to back, a loophole that could allow local hidden-variable models to explain experimental data.
“Moreover, the entanglement is only perfect for photons that are emitted back to back, a loophole that could allow local hidden-variable model to explain the experimental data (Santos, 1991(Santos, , 1992)).”
From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Santos, 1992
In the indexed Abstract (page not specified), Santos says poor angular correlation makes atomic-cascade experiments unsuitable for distinguishing local hidden-variable theories from quantum mechanics, and describes a local hidden-variable model agreeing with measurable predictions. The copy does not say that entanglement is perfect only for photons emitted back to back. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Emilio Santos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1388 (1991).
- E. Santos, in Proceedings of the Conference on Bell' s Theorem and the Foundations of Modern Physics, Cese- na, Italy, October 1991 (to be published}.
- J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974).
- S. Caser, Phys. Lett. A 121, 331 (1987).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry
Pan, J.-W., Chen, Z.-B., Lu, C.-Y., Weinfurter, H., Zeilinger, A., & Żukowski, M. (2012) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.84.777 · Cited by 1,410 · see citing works
Quantum mechanics and Bell’s inequalities
Jones, R. T., & Adelberger, E. G. (1994) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.72.2675 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Santos, E.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Cantabria (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Santos, Emilio
- ORCID
- Santos, Emilio
- Venue
- Physical Review Letters
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 1992-04-27
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 2702-2703
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W611475402
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCrea (University of Cantabria) (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
- Keywords
- Bell inequalities, Clauser-Horne inequality, quantum mechanics, local hidden variable theories, Bell nonlocality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
