I think that it makes more sense to say that things do not have classical values in space and time until they interact or are measured. To suggest QM is not local violates Relativity. Or even better perhaps to suggest as Lemaitre did in 1932 is that space and time are the results of quantum interactions. And besides all that, I think that 't Hooft has a few papers showing that QM is a result of fast variables --not hidden variables. [I.e. that it is classical.] [And Springer Verlag has published a book of his on this issue]
Quantum Mechanics does not violate local causality.
[I wrote this a long time ago, but here let me just make clear that because it violates Bell's inequality you have two possibilities: Either (1) it violates causality and Relativity, or (2) particles have no classical values until measured or interact. Since we know Relativity is correct because of many things e.g., GPS (global positioning satellites) or meson decay and many other thing, so it must be (2) that particles do not have classical values in Space and Time until they interact. ]
Though I did not read the paper of Lemaitre, I assume his idea came from the fact that the quantity of (delta E) times (delta t) is different that delta p delta x. Time is a different ort of quantity in QM. The longer the time goes, the greater uncertainty there is. Time does not strictly act on anything but rather is produced by the uncertainty.
i mean that no uncertainty in time means infinite uncertainty about energy. an accurate value of energy produces infinite time.
