Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1509.06896 · Physical Review A

Optimal no-go theorem on hidden-variable predictions of effect expectations

Andreas R. Blass, Yuri G. Gurevich

Published Mar 26, 2018• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

No-go theorems prove that, under reasonable assumptions, classical hidden-variable theories cannot reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics. Traditional no-go theorems proved that hidden-variable theories cannot predict correctly the values of observables. Recent expectation no-go theorems prove that hidden-variable theories cannot predict the expectations of observables. We prove the strongest expectation-focused no-go theorem to date. It is optimal in the sense that the natural weakenings of the assumptions and the natural strengthenings of the conclusion make the theorem fail. The literature on expectation no-go theorems strongly suggests that the expectation-focused approach is more general than the value-focused one. We establish that the expectation approach is not more general.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.97.032126

Related papers

Common Denominator for Value and Expectation No-Go Theorems

Andreas R. Blass, Yuri G. Gurevich

Hidden-variable (HV) theories allege that a quantum state describes an ensemble of systems distinguished by the values of hidden variables. No-go theorems assert that HV theories cannot match the predictions of quantum theory. The present work started with repairing flaws in the literature on no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the expectation values of measurements. That literature gives one an impression that expectation no-go theorems subsume the time-honored no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the possible values of measurements. But the two approaches speak about different kinds of measurement. This hinders comparing them to each other. Only projection measurements are common to both. Here, we sharpen the results of both approaches so that only projection measurements are used. This allows us to clarify the similarities and differences between the two approaches. Neither one dominates the other.

arXiv:1707.07368•Jul 24, 2017•24 citations

Common Denominator for Value and Expectation No-go Theorems: Extended Abstract

Andreas R. Blass, Yuri G. Gurevich

Hidden-variable (HV) theories allege that a quantum state describes an ensemble of systems distinguished by the values of hidden variables. No-go theorems assert that HV theories cannot match the predictions of quantum theory. The present work started with repairing flaws in the literature on no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the expectation values of measurements. That literature gives one an impression that expectation no-go theorems subsume the time-honored no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the possible values of measurements. But the two approaches speak about different kinds of measurement. This hinders comparing them to each other. Only projection measurements are common to both. Here, we sharpen the results of both approaches so that only projection measurements are used. This allows us to clarify the similarities and differences between the two approaches. Neither one dominates the other.

arXiv:1803.00697•Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science•Feb 27, 2018•0 citations

On local-hidden-variable no-go theorems

André Allan Méthot

The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimatly doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. 1

•Jul 15, 2005•11 citations

On local-hidden-variable no-go theorems

André Allan Méthot

The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimately doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus, we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities, and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. PACS Nos.: 03.65.–w, 03.65.Ud, 03.65.Ta

arXiv:quant-ph/0507149•Canadian Journal of Physics•Jan 15, 2006•7 citations

Hidden Variables and Incompatible Observables in Quantum Mechanics

Benjamin H. Feintzeig

This article takes up a suggestion that the reason we cannot find certain hidden variable theories for quantum mechanics, as in Bell’s theorem, is that we require them to assign joint probability distributions on incompatible observables. These joint distributions are problematic because they are empirically meaningless on one standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. Some have proposed getting around this problem by using generalized probability spaces. I present a theorem to show a sense in which generalized probability spaces can’t serve as hidden variable theories for quantum mechanics, so the proposal for getting around Bell’s theorem fails. 1 Introduction2 Bell’s Theorem and Classical Probability Spaces 2.1 Bell’s derivation of the Bell inequalities 2.2 Pitowsky’s derivation of the Bell inequalities3 Incompatible Observables4 Generalized Probability Spaces5 A ‘No-Go’ Theorem6 Conclusions

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•Aug 31, 2014•5 citations

The “Hidden Variables” Approach

Bernard d’Espagnat

Any theory whatsoever which, in all circumstances, attributes definite properties to non-interacting physical objects necessarily violates some of the predictions of quantum mechanics. The very existence of the hidden variables theories should, however, prompt to have a second look at the problem. The theory necessarily implies the existence of a violent nonlocality effect which, as a matter of fact, may reasonably be considered as similar to—and even more surprising than—the nonseparability of the orthodox theory. The simultaneous existence of non-separability effects and of the principle that the velocity of propagation of interactions is finite raises nontrivial conceptual problems. One possible way to study these problems is to make use of the fact that hidden variables theories exist which reproduce correctly the verifiable predictions of quantum mechanics. For the ensembles the expectation values coincide, of course, with the observed value.

CRC Press eBooks•Mar 5, 2018•1 citation
No-go theorems prove that, under reasonable assumptions, classical hidden-variable theories cannot reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics. Traditional no-go theorems proved that hidden-variable theories cannot predict correctly the values of observables. Recent expectation no-go theorems prove that hidden-variable theories cannot predict the expectations of observables. We prove the strongest expectation-focused no-go theorem to date. It is optimal in the sense that the natural weakenings of the assumptions and the natural strengthenings of the conclusion make the theorem fail. The literature on expectation no-go theorems strongly suggests that the expectation-focused approach is more general than the value-focused one. We establish that the expectation approach is not more general.
Hidden-variable (HV) theories allege that a quantum state describes an ensemble of systems distinguished by the values of hidden variables. No-go theorems assert that HV theories cannot match the predictions of quantum theory. The present work started with repairing flaws in the literature on no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the expectation values of measurements. That literature gives one an impression that expectation no-go theorems subsume the time-honored no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the possible values of measurements. But the two approaches speak about different kinds of measurement. This hinders comparing them to each other. Only projection measurements are common to both. Here, we sharpen the results of both approaches so that only projection measurements are used. This allows us to clarify the similarities and differences between the two approaches. Neither one dominates the other.
Hidden-variable (HV) theories allege that a quantum state describes an ensemble of systems distinguished by the values of hidden variables. No-go theorems assert that HV theories cannot match the predictions of quantum theory. The present work started with repairing flaws in the literature on no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the expectation values of measurements. That literature gives one an impression that expectation no-go theorems subsume the time-honored no-go theorems asserting that HV theories cannot predict the possible values of measurements. But the two approaches speak about different kinds of measurement. This hinders comparing them to each other. Only projection measurements are common to both. Here, we sharpen the results of both approaches so that only projection measurements are used. This allows us to clarify the similarities and differences between the two approaches. Neither one dominates the other.
The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimatly doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. 1
The strongest attack against quantum mechanics came in 1935 in the form of a paper by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. It was argued that the theory of quantum mechanics could not be called a complete theory of Nature, for every element of reality is not represented in the formalism as such. The authors then put forth a proposition: we must search for a theory where, upon knowing everything about the system, including possible hidden variables, one could make precise predictions concerning elements of reality. This project was ultimately doomed in 1964 with the work of Bell, who showed that the most general local hidden variable theory could not reproduce correlations that arise in quantum mechanics. There exist mainly three forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories. Although almost every physicist knows the consequences of these no-go theorems, not every physicist is aware of the distinctions between the three or even their exact definitions. Thus, we will discuss here the three principal forms of no-go theorems for local hidden variable theories of Nature. We will define Bell theorems, Bell theorems without inequalities, and pseudo-telepathy. A discussion of the similarities and differences will follow. PACS Nos.: 03.65.–w, 03.65.Ud, 03.65.Ta
This article takes up a suggestion that the reason we cannot find certain hidden variable theories for quantum mechanics, as in Bell’s theorem, is that we require them to assign joint probability distributions on incompatible observables. These joint distributions are problematic because they are empirically meaningless on one standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. Some have proposed getting around this problem by using generalized probability spaces. I present a theorem to show a sense in which generalized probability spaces can’t serve as hidden variable theories for quantum mechanics, so the proposal for getting around Bell’s theorem fails. 1 Introduction2 Bell’s Theorem and Classical Probability Spaces 2.1 Bell’s derivation of the Bell inequalities 2.2 Pitowsky’s derivation of the Bell inequalities3 Incompatible Observables4 Generalized Probability Spaces5 A ‘No-Go’ Theorem6 Conclusions
Any theory whatsoever which, in all circumstances, attributes definite properties to non-interacting physical objects necessarily violates some of the predictions of quantum mechanics. The very existence of the hidden variables theories should, however, prompt to have a second look at the problem. The theory necessarily implies the existence of a violent nonlocality effect which, as a matter of fact, may reasonably be considered as similar to—and even more surprising than—the nonseparability of the orthodox theory. The simultaneous existence of non-separability effects and of the principle that the velocity of propagation of interactions is finite raises nontrivial conceptual problems. One possible way to study these problems is to make use of the fact that hidden variables theories exist which reproduce correctly the verifiable predictions of quantum mechanics. For the ensembles the expectation values coincide, of course, with the observed value.