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.
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.
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.
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
We examine the conditions under which quantum parameter estimation is compatible with the concept of a ``true'' quantity value: a unique value of the estimated quantity that exists prior to and independently of measurement. While quantum parameter estimation typically assumes that the quantity to be estimated is a parameter, we argue that this assumption can be lifted, opening the way to a more general formulation of estimation that may apply even in situations where the quantity to be estimated is no longer a parameter, but instead a quantum variable susceptible to quantum fluctuations. We identify three assumptions that characterize the way estimation is often presented in the quantum metrology literature, namely, as a procedure for inferring an unknown ``true value", which is assumed to be unique and to exist prior to and independently of measurement. Using our more general framework, we prove a no-go theorem showing that the preceding assumptions are jointly incompatible with two further assumptions: the completeness of the quantum state (no `hidden variables'), and the presence of entanglement between the probe systems and the system under measurement. We note that the presence of such entanglement is a generic prediction of standard quantum theory. Consequently, if one is not willing to accept hidden variables, nor willing to modify standard quantum theory by introducing a new physical mechanism that destroys entanglement at some scale or regime, then a realist account of estimation is ultimately impossible.
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
Abstract In chapter 12 we give an overview of the historical development of hidden-variable theories aiming to attribute ‘hidden’ definite outcomes to any potential measurement on a quantum system. We start with a discussion of von Neumann’s assumption on hidden-variable models, which was later realized not to hold by Hermann, Kochen, Specker, and Bell, going into detail on Bell’s refutation of von Neumann’s arguments. We then turn to the notion of contextuality, which severely restricts hidden-variable models: we discuss Gleason’s theorem before stating and proving the famous Kochen-Specker theorem, as well as the simpler versions of Peres’ nonet and Mermin’s pentagram. These results show that quantum mechanics is not compatible with the assignment of definite measurement outcomes to all possible measurements, and such assignments can hence only be made once a restricted set of observables, a context, is selected