@article{Barukčić_2006, title={Bell’s Theorem - A fallacy of the excluded middle}, volume={1}, url={http://causation.eu/index.php/causation/article/view/5}, abstractNote={<p>Albert Einstein never really accepted quantum mechanics. According to Einstein, quantum mechanics is not a complete physical theory. Einstein's dissatisfaction with quantum mechanic's intrinsic randomness lead to the famous Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen thought experiment and the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox (EPR paradox) which assumes local realism. The Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen thought experiment was the origin of J. S. Bell's publication in 1964. After the publication of Bell's theorem, a variety of experiments were devised to test Bell's inequalities. One of the first experimental tests of Bell's inequality were performed by Freedman and Clauser (1972). Some dramatic violations of Bell's inequality have been reported by so called Bell test experiments. This is taken as empirical evidence against local realism and as positive evidence in favour of quantum mechanics. It is claimed that under local realist theories Bell inequalities cannot be violated. Contrary to this, quantum mechanics predicts that the Bell inequalities will be violated. Who is right, who is wrong? Does quantum mechanics exclude local realism and thus relativity and vice versa? Are there local realist hopes for quantum mechanics besides of Bell's theorem?<br>However, does parameters exist whether they are measured or not, does measurement disturb the thing being measured. Nonetheless, the time has come to close the book completely on Bell's theorem. The purpose of this publication is to refute Bell's theorem definitely by the proof that</p> <p><strong>Bell's theorem is a fallacy of the excluded middle.</strong></p>}, number={2}, journal={Causation}, author={Barukčić, Ilija}, year={2006}, month={Dec.}, pages={5–26} }