as a simple demonstration that ordinary quantum mechanics is not locally causal, crediting the argument of EPR \[1935\]. He begins

> Each of the counters considered separately has on each repetition of the experiment a 50% chance of saying ‘yes’.

Each of the chances $Ch_{p}(e_{A}),Ch_{p^{\prime }}(e_{B})$ is $\frac12$, as Bell says: but $Ch_{q}(e_{A})=1$. After noting that quantum theory here requires a perfect correlation between the outcomes in $\mathbf{1,2}$, he continues

> “So specification of the result on one side permits a 100% confident prediction of the previously totally uncertain result on the other side. Now in ordinary quantum mechanics there just *is* nothing but the wavefunction for calculating probabilities. There is then no question of making the result on one side redundant on the other by more fully specifying events in some space-time region $\mathbf{3}$. We have a violation of local causality.”

It is true that (\[Factorizability\]) and (\[FactorizabilitySU\]) fail here, since $Pr_{a,a}^{\Phi ^{+}}(V_{A}|V_{B})=1$, $Pr_{a,a}^{\Phi
^{+}}(H_{A}|V_{B})=0$, while $Pr_{a,a}^{\Phi ^{+}}(A)=Pr_{a,a}^{\Phi
^{+}}(B)={\frac12}$. But does that constitute a violation of local causality? (LC) and (LC$_{SU}$) are both conditions straightforwardly applicable to a theory whose general probabilities yield a *unique* chance for each possible outcome in $\mathbf{1}$ prior to its occurrence. In the case 