Paper detail

Not all entangled states violate Leggett's crypto-nonlocality

This note is a reply to M. Navascués' claim that "all entangled states violate Leggett's crypto-nonlocality" [arXiv:1303.5124v2]. I argue that such a conclusion can only be reached if one introduces additional assumptions that further restrict Leggett's notion of "crypto-nonlocality". If a contrario one sticks only to Leggett's original axioms, there exist entangled states whose correlations are always compatible with Leggett's crypto-nonlocality---which is thus a genuinely different concept from quantum separability. I clarify in this note the relation between these two notions, together also with Bell's assumption of local causality.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.