This text is an introduction to an operational outlook on Bell inequalities, which has been very fruitful in the past few years. It has lead to the recognition that Bell tests have their own place in applied quantum technologies, because they quantify non-classicality in a device-independent way, that is, without any need to describe the degrees of freedom under study and the measurements that are performed. At the more fundamental level, the same device-independent outlook has allowed the falsification of several other alternative models that could hope to reproduce the observed statistics while keeping some classical features that quantum theory denies; and it has shed new light on the long-standing quest for deriving quantum theory from physical principles.
This text is an introduction to an operational outlook on Bell inequalities, which has been very fruitful in the past few years. It has lead to the recognition that Bell tests have their own place in applied quantum technologies, because they quantify non-classicality in a device-independent way, that is, without any need to describe the degrees of freedom under study and the measurements that are performed. At the more fundamental level, the same device-independent outlook has allowed the falsification of several other alternative models that could hope to reproduce the observed statistics while keeping some classical features that quantum theory denies; and it has shed new light on the long-standing quest for deriving quantum theory from physical principles.
Introduction Annus mirabilis 1964 1964 was a wonderful year for physics. In this annus mirabilis, summarising and simplifying a little, the quark model was proposed by Gell-Mann and Zweig and charm and colour properties were introduced, Higgs published his work on the scalar boson, the _ boson and CP violation were discovered, cosmic background radiation was identified and, finally, Bell inequalities were suggested. Most of these works were later subjects of a Nobel prize. Unluckily John Bell left us too early for this achievement, but, at least in my opinion, his work [1] is probably the most fruitful among all these huge advances, since now we can recognise that it was the root of a fundamental change in our vision of the physical world, providing, on one hand, the possibility of a test of quantum mechanics against a whole class of theories (substantially all the theories that we could define as “classical”) and, on the other hand, introducing a clear notion of quantum nonlocality that represents not only a challenge in understanding quantum mechanics, but also one of the most important resources paving the way to quantum technologies that were developed in the last decades based on the quantum correlations discussed in the Bell paper. In the following we will present the experimental progress in testing Bell inequalities. Rather amazingly even 50 years after Bell's paper, a conclusive test of his proposal is still missing [2, 3]. Nevertheless, huge progress has been achieved with respect to the first experiments.We will discuss these developments and the remaining problems for a conclusive test of Bell inequalities in detail. The Bell Inequalities, Their Hypotheses and the Experimental Loopholes In order to understand the experimental difficulties in achieving a final test of Bell inequalities, let us analyse a little how these inequalities are derived and the explicit and implicit hypotheses they contain. The proof of Bell inequalities usually starts by considering two separated subsystems of an entangled state, which are addressed to two independent measurement apparatuses measuring the expectation values of two dichotomic observables, Aa and B b . a, b are two parameters describing the settings of the measuring apparatus A and B , respectively.
The purpose of this lecture is to give a self-contained demonstration of a version of Bell's theorem and a discussion of the significance of the theorem and the experiments which it inspired. The lecture should be comprehensible to people who have had no previous acquaintance with the literature on Bell's theorem, but I hope that explicitness about premisses and consequences will make it useful even to those who are familiar with the literature. All versions of Bell's theorem are variations, and usually generalizations, of the pioneering paper of J. S. Bell of 1964, entitled “On the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Paradox.” All of them consider an ensemble of pairs of particles prepared in a uniform manner, so that statistical correlations may be expected between outcomes of tests performed on the particles of each pair. If each pair in the ensemble is characterized by the same quantum state φ, then the quantum mechanical predictions for correlations of the outcomes can in principle be calculated when the tests are specified. On the other hand, if it is assumed that the statistical behavior of the pairs is governed by a theory which satisfies certain independence conditions (always similar to the Parameter and Outcome Independence conditions stated below, though the exact details vary from version to version of Bell's theorem), then it is possible to derive a restriction upon the statistical correlations of the outcomes of tests upon the two particles.
We review a series of recent no-go theorems that extend the methodological and conceptual framework introduced by Bell's theorem to more sophisticated operational scenarios involving independent sources, quantum networks, joint measurements, and multiple observers. Many of these results were originally developed within quantum information science and are scattered across the literature, where their technical and application-driven success has partly obscured their broader foundational significance. We organize them around a common Bell-inspired methodology that extends beyond quantum nonlocality, and emphasize how increasingly rich operational structures change which physical assumptions can be tested.
Does quantum theory apply at all scales, including that of observers? New light on this fundamental question has recently been shed through a resurgence of interest in the long-standing Wigner’s friend paradox. This is a thought experiment addressing the quantum measurement problem—the difficulty of reconciling the (unitary, deterministic) evolution of isolated systems and the (non-unitary, probabilistic) state update after a measurement. Here, by building on a scenario with two separated but entangled friends introduced by Brukner, we prove that if quantum evolution is controllable on the scale of an observer, then one of ‘No-Superdeterminism’, ‘Locality’ or ‘Absoluteness of Observed Events’—that every observed event exists absolutely, not relatively—must be false. We show that although the violation of Bell-type inequalities in such scenarios is not in general sufficient to demonstrate the contradiction between those three assumptions, new inequalities can be derived, in a theory-independent manner, that are violated by quantum correlations. This is demonstrated in a proof-of-principle experiment where a photon’s path is deemed an observer. We discuss how this new theorem places strictly stronger constraints on physical reality than Bell’s theorem. For a scenario of two separated but entangled observers, inequalities are derived from three fundamental assumptions. An experiment shows that these inequalities can be violated if quantum evolution is controllable on the scale of an observer.
The Bell's theorem stands as an insuperable roadblock in the path to a very desired intuitive solution of the EPR paradox and, hence, it lies at the core of the current lack of a clear interpretation of the quantum formalism. The theorem states through an experimentally testable inequality that the predictions of quantum mechanics for the Bell's polarization states of two entangled particles cannot be reproduced by any statistical model of hidden variables that shares certain intuitive features. In this paper, we show, however, that the proof of the Bell's theorem involves a subtle, though crucial, assumption that is not required by fundamental physical principles and, hence, it is not necessarily fulfilled in the experimental setup that tests the inequality. Indeed, this assumption can neither be properly implemented within the standard framework of quantum mechanics. Namely, the proof of the theorem assumes that there exists a preferred absolute frame of reference, supposedly provided by the lab, which enables to compare the orientation of the polarization measurement devices for successive realizations of the experiment and, hence, to define jointly their response functions over the space of hypothetical hidden configurations for all their possible alternative settings. We notice, however, that only the relative orientation between the two measurement devices in every single realization of the experiment is a properly defined physical degree of freedom, while their global rigid orientation is a spurious gauge degree of freedom. Hence, the preferred frame of reference required by the proof of the Bell's theorem does not necessarily exist. In fact, it cannot exist in models in which the gauge symmetry of the experimental setup under global rigid rotations of the two detectors is spontaneously broken by the hidden configurations of the pair of entangled particles and a non-zero geometric phase appears under some cyclic gauge symmetry transformations. Following this observation, we build an explicitly local model of hidden variables that reproduces the predictions of quantum mechanics for the Bell's states.