The Kochen-Specker Theorem The Kochen-Specker theorem is an important and subtle, topic in the foundations of quantum mechanics (QM).

The theorem demonstrates the impossibility of a certain type of interpreta tion of QM in terms of hidden variables (HV) that naturally suggests itself when one begins to consider the project of interpretating QM.We here present the the orem/argument and the foundational discussion surrounding it at different levels . The reader looking for a quick overview should read the following sections and subsections: 1, 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4, and 6. Those who read the whole entry will find proofs of some non-trivial claims in supplementary documents. Introduction QM has the peculiar property that quantum-mechanical states imply, in general, o nly statistical restrictions on the results of measurements. The natural conclus ion to be drawn is that these states are incomplete descriptions of quantum syst ems. QM, thus, would be incomplete in the sense that a typical QM state descript ion of an individual system could be supplemented with a more complete descripti on in terms of an HV theory. In an HV description of the system the QM probabili ties would be naturally interpreted as epistemic probabilities of the sort that arise in ordinary statistical mechanics. Such an HV description might not be pra ctically useful, but one is tempted to think that it should at least be possible in principle. There are, however, two powerful theorems to the effect that such a description is subject to severe constraints: QM, given certain at least prim a facie plausible premises, cannot be supplemented by an HV theory. The more fam ous of these two theorems is Bell's theorem which states that, given a premise o f locality, an HV model cannot match the statistical predictions of QM. The seco nd important no-go theorem against HV theories is the theorem of Kochen and Spec ker (KS) which states that, given a premise of noncontextuality (to be explained presently) certain sets of QM observables cannot consistently be assigned value s at all (even before the question of their statistical distributions arises). Before seeing the workings of the KS theorem in some detail, we must clarify why it is of importance to philosophers of science. The explicit premise of HV inte rpretations, as understood throughout below, is one of value definiteness: (VD) All observables defined for a QM system have definite values at all tim es. (Note that for Bohmian Mechanics often viewed as an HV interpretation of QM, thi s statement would have to be qualified.) [1] VD is motivated by an apparently in nocuous assumption about experimental results, which is reflected in the custom of referring to quantum experiments as "measurements," namely, that these experi ments reveal vales that exist independently of being measured. (Note that we do not need to assume here that the values are faithfully revealed by measurement, but only that they exist!) This suggest a second, seemingly innocuous assumption , that of noncontextuality: (NC) If a QM system possesses a property (value of an observable), then it d oes so independently of any measurement context, i.e. independently of how that value is eventually measured. When applied to specific properties that can be measured in different incompatib le measurements, NC says that these properties are the same in these different m easurement situations. Now, suppose we adopt the usual association of properties of a quantum system, t hat is, yes-no observables, and projection operators on the system's Hilbert spa

ce. (O) There is a one-one correspondence between properties of a quantum system and projection operators on the system's Hilbert space The KS theorem establishes a contradiction between VD + NC + O and QM; thus, acc eptance of QM logically forces us to renounce either VD or NC or O. If a HV theory satisfying these conditions were feasible, we would have a natura l explanation of the statistical character of QM, and an elegant way of resolvin g the infamous measurement problem haunting all interpreters of QM (see the entr ies on quantum mechanics and measurement in quantum theory for details). What th e KS theorem shows is that a HV theory of the most straightforward sort, satisfy ing these conditions, is not an option. The HV program is left with only options that violate one or more of these conditions; see entries on Bohmian mechanics and modal interpretations of quantum mechanics.