Bell's theorem is the opium of the masses. It is religiously believed by many and understood by a very few. Below is an example of referee-comments I have repeatedly faced during the past ten years. Such ignorance by the community has politically corrupted not only individuals but also academic institutions like Perimeter Institute, Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi), nearly every editor of any respected physics journal, and even my own college at Oxford University (namely, Wolfson College).

Reviewer 1 wrote:The key defect of the work is that Bell's theorem is a well established result in quantum theory. It excludes any locally causal description of quantum mechanics. In light of this, the more ambitious statements in the paper cannot be believed.

It does not matter which journal this was for and for which work of mine these comments were made. They are all the same. They are all controlled by the Bell Mafia.

The following was my reply:

Joy Christian wrote:Reviewer 1 states that Bell's theorem is "a result in quantum theory." But, in fact, Bell's theorem is not a result in quantum theory at all. It is a serious misconception to think that Bell's theorem is a "result in quantum theory." In the derivation of Bell inequalities not a single concept of quantum theory is used. In the derivation we do not find any concepts such as Hilbert space, uncertainty principle, superposition principle, quantum entanglement, or projection postulate. The derivation of Bell inequalities is based on purely classical concepts involving four incompatible experiments, performable only at mutually exclusive measurement directions. It is simply impossible to perform the four experiments simultaneously in any possible world, classical or quantum. Thus Bell inequalities are derived by averaging over events that cannot possibly occur in any possible world, classical or quantum. As such, Bell inequalities are irrelevant for any physically possible experiments in either classical or quantum world. I have explained this fatal mistake in Bell's argument in considerable detail in the subsection IV B of the revised manuscript. Since a mistaken argument cannot exclude anything, Bell's theorem does not exclude a locally causal understanding of quantum correlations. For Bell's argument to be capable of implying any such thing, it has to be both valid as well as relevant for physically possible experiments. But it is neither valid nor relevant for physically possible experiments. Note also that there exist in the literature dozens of papers published in respected journals that point out various mistakes made by Bell and his followers in their arguments against locality and realism. But the one I have presented in subsection IV B of the revised manuscript is more than sufficient for our purposes here.

Guess what happened after I exposed the stupidity of the ignorant Reviewer 1 ?

It didn't matter that Reviewer 2 had already endorsed my paper for publication.

Joy Christian

***