Editing John Stewart Bell (section)

===Conclusions from experimental tests===
In 1972 an experiment was conducted&nbsp;that, when extrapolated to ideal detector efficiencies, showed a violation of Bell's inequality.<ref name = "SJF1972">{{cite journal 
| last1 = Freedman
| first1 = Stuart J.
| last2 = Clauser
| first2 = John F.
| author-link1 = Stuart Freedman
| author-link2 = John Clauser
| journal = Physical Review Letters
| volume = 28
| pages = 938-41
| year = 1972
| title = Experimental Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories
| doi = 10.1103/PhysRevLett.28.938
}}</ref> It was the first of many such experiments. Bell himself concluded from these experiments that "It now seems that the non-locality is deeply rooted in quantum mechanics itself and will persist in any completion."<ref name="Bell1987"/>{{rp|132}} This, according to Bell, also implied that quantum theory is not locally causal and cannot be embedded into any locally causal theory.  Bell regretted that results of the tests did not agree with the concept of local hidden variables:

<blockquote>For me, it is so reasonable to assume that the photons in those experiments carry with them programs, which have been correlated in advance, telling them how to behave. This is so rational that I think that when Einstein saw that, and the others refused to see it, ''he'' was the rational man. The other people, although history has justified them, were burying their heads in the sand. ...  So for me, it is a pity that Einstein's idea doesn't work. The reasonable thing just doesn't work."<ref name="Bernstein1991">{{cite book
 | first = Jeremy
 | last = Bernstein
 | year = 1991
 | title = Quantum Profiles
 | publisher = Princeton University Press
 | location = Princeton
 | url = https://archive.org/details/quantumprofiles00bern
 | url-access = registration
 | oclc = 21971886
 | isbn = 978-0691087252
}}</ref>{{rp|84}}</blockquote>

Bell seemed to have become resigned to the notion that future experiments would continue to agree with quantum mechanics and violate his inequality. Referring to the [[Bell test experiments]], he remarked:

<blockquote>It is difficult for me to believe that quantum mechanics, working very well for currently practical set-ups, will nevertheless fail badly with improvements in counter efficiency ..."<ref name="Bell1987"/>{{rp|109}}</blockquote>

Some people continue to believe that agreement with Bell's inequalities might yet be saved. They argue that in the future much more precise experiments could reveal that one of the known [[Bell test loopholes|loopholes]], for example the so-called "fair sampling loophole", had been biasing the interpretations.  Most mainstream physicists are highly skeptical about all these "loopholes", admitting their existence but continuing to believe that Bell's inequalities must fail.

Bell remained interested in objective 'observer-free' quantum mechanics.<ref name="Sudbery2018">{{cite journal
 | last = Sudbery
 | first = Anthony
 | title = John Bell and the Great Enterprise
 | journal = Quanta
 | volume = 7
 | issue = 1
 | pages = 68–73
 | year = 2018
 | doi = 10.12743/quanta.v7i1.79
 | mr = 3894852
 | arxiv = 1808.06845
| s2cid = 53705805
 }}</ref> He felt that at the most fundamental level, physical theories ought not to be concerned with observables, but with 'be-ables': "The [[wikt:beable|beables]] of the theory are those elements which might correspond to elements of reality, to things which exist. Their existence does not depend on 'observation'."<ref name="Bell1987"/>{{rp|174}} He remained impressed with Bohm's hidden variables as an example of such a scheme and he attacked the more subjective alternatives such as the [[Copenhagen interpretation]].<ref name="Bell1987"/>{{rp|92,133,181}}