That many photons can be in an entangled state doesn't have anything to do with the fact that photons can be absorbed by matter.

However to eliminate, in practice, classical effects-that are described by electromagnetic waves, that are superpositions of many photons-from quantum effects, such as the entanglement of individual photons isn't an easy task.

The physical meaning of entangled photons, whether one pair or many pairs, would have a measurement at location A influence a corresponding measurement at location B. It is argued that without entanglement the stronger correlations of the measurements are not possible. This is easily rebutted as clearly proved in the attached reference of the first comment.

It's important to distinguish two issues: computing the effects of entanglement on the structure factor and measuring these effects in practice. The claim that the calculation itself is inconsistent is, simply, wrong-it's straightforward to do it. What isn't that obvious is how to measure the effect in practice.

The same experimental results that lead to Bell inequalities can be explained by using single and independent qubits of polarization. The quantum Rayleigh spontaneous emission generates these single and independent qubits and the expectation values of the correlations are identical to those obtained from entangled polarization photons which were absorbed by the quantum Rayleigh process.

Then what's the issue?

The entanglement is supposed to underpin the quantum non-locality and other mysterious effects. But, once the experiments can be explained without entanglement, those results no longer support the conclusions of quantum non-locality. There are also other arguments against quantum non-locality which are based on interpretations of lack of information.

That the probability distribution of more than one photons doesn't generically factorize isn't anything strange. Quantum effects are non-local, precisely because multiphoton states, where the photons can be resolved, obey Bose-Einstein statistics, not Boltzmann statistics. Multiphoton states, where the photons aren't resolved, are classical states, that obey Boltzmann statistics; that's all.

The statement that Bell's inequalities are satisfied by independent qubits is, simply, wrong-the inequalities describe, precisely, the fact that the distributions don't factorize.

Bell’s inequalities describe the possibility of the existence of “classical” hidden variables that would explain measurements carried out to prove quantum non-locality. Once the inequalities are violated, it is claimed that no other physical interpretation is possible. Have you read the article:

F. J. Tipler, Quantum nonlocality does not exist, PNAS 111 (31), 11281-11286, August 5, 2014; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1324238111.

The quantum Rayleigh spontaneous emission takes place in any dielectric medium and destroys any entangled state of a pair of photons, as well as any non-factorization of photon number states.

The absorption of one photon through quantum Rayleigh conversion leads to the disappearance of an entangled state of one pair of photons which is, allegedly, used in experiments. A similar annihilation occurs for the second photon. Alternatively, the dipole-field interaction of absorption projects the state onto the zero-photon state, resulting in one single photon surviving as soon as the entangled pair was created in a parametric spontaneous, down- converted emission in an optically nonlinear crystal. Unless two state functions or relevant operators overlap in the space-time of their configuration, i. e. f 1(r, t) ≠ 0 and f 2 (r, t) ≠ 0, their product will be zero [5].

There are many physically meaningful explanations for the experimental results claiming to prove quantum non-locality which is physically impossible, if only because it happens scarcely upon local comparison of results.

Therefore, quantum non-locality does not exist as already proved in reference:

M. Ringbauer, C. Giarmatzi, R. Chaves, F. Costa, A. G. White and A. Fedrizzi, ”Experimental test of nonlocal causality”, Science Advances 10 Aug 2016: Vol. 2, no. 8, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1600162.

The Bell inequalities are violated by independent and single polarization qubits.