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:2001.00681 · Physical Review A

Bell's theorem for trajectories

Dragoljub Gočanin, Aleksandra Dimić, Flavio Del Santo, Borivoje Dakić

Published Aug 7, 2020• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In classical theory, the trajectory of a particle is entirely predetermined by the complete set of initial conditions via dynamical laws. Based on this, we formulate a no-go theorem for the dynamics of classical particles, i.e., a Bell inequality for trajectories, and discuss its possible violation in a quantum scenario. A trajectory, however, is not an outcome of a quantum measurement, in the sense that there is no observable associated with it, and thus there is no ``direct'' experimental test of the Bell inequality for trajectories. Nevertheless, we show how to overcome this problem by considering a special case of our generic inequality that can be experimentally tested point-by-point in time. Such inequality is indeed violated by quantum mechanics, and the violation persists during an entire interval of time and not just at a particular singular instant. We interpret the violation to imply that trajectories (or at least pieces thereof) cannot exist predetermined, within a local-realistic theory.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.102.020201

Related papers

Bell argument: Locality or realism? Time to make the choice

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

This paper discusses a possible resolution of the nonobjectivity-nonlocality dilemma in quantum mechanics in 'the light of experimental tests of the Bell inequality for two entangled photons and a Bell-like inequality for a single neutron. My conclusion is that these experiments show that quantum mechanics is nonobjective: that is, the values of physical observables cannot be assigned to a system before measurement. Bell's assumption of nonlocality has to be rejected as having no direct experimental confirmation, at least thus far. I also consider the relationships between nonobjectivity and contextuality. Specifically, I analyze the impact of the Kochen-Specker theorem on the problem of contextuality of quantum observables. I argue that, just as von Neumann's "no-go" theorem, the Kochen-Specker theorem is based on assumptions that do not correspond to the real physical situation. Finally, I present a theory of measurement based on a classical, purely wave model (pre-quantum classical statistical field theory), a model that reproduces quantum probabilities. In this model continuous fields are transformed into discrete clicks of detectors. While this model is classical, it is nonobjective. In this case, nonobjectivity is the result of the dependence of experimental outcomes on the context of measurement, in accordance with Bohr's view.

arXiv:1108.0001•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•26 citations

Bell's Theorem and "Classical" Probability Theory

H. Razmi, Mohammad Golshani

Using CH model of Bell’s theorem and only by applying the conditional probability definition in ”classical ” probability theory,without imposing the locality condition,we are able to show that the stochastic realistic (CH) model cannot reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics. PACS number: 03.65.Bz It is generally claimed that Bell inequalities are inconsistent with experimental data and with the predictions of quantum mechanics.A condition often used in the derivation of Bell inequalities is the so-called locality condition.The temptation is to attribute Bell inequalities violation to the violation of locality. In this paper we are going

arXiv:quant-ph/9811072•Nov 25, 1998•0 citations

Bell inequalities and hidden variables over all possible paths in a quantum system

Leffler, Warren

Bell's theorem rests on the following fundamental condition for a local system: P(a,b|alpha, beta, lambda)= P(a|alpha, lambda)P(b|beta, lambda). Here a and b are the outcomes respectively for measurements alpha on one side, and beta on the other, of an experiment involving two entangled particles traveling in opposite directions from a source. The parameter lambda (the set of "hidden variables") represents a more complete description of the joint state of the two particles. Because of lambda, the joint probability of detection is now dependent only on lambda and the local measurement setting of alpha; similarly for the other side and the setting beta. From this equation John Bell derived a simple inequality that is violated by the predictions of quantum mechanics, which is generally taken to imply that quantum mechanics is a nonlocal theory. But, by combining Richard Feynman's formulation of quantum mechanics with a model of particle interaction described by David Deutsch, we develop a system (the "space of all paths," SP) that (1) is immediately seen to replicate the predictions of quantum mechanics, (2) has a single outcome for each quantum event (unlike MWI on which it is partly based), and (3) contains the set lambda of hidden variables consisting of all possible paths from the source to the detectors on each side of the two-particle experiment. However, the set lambda is nonmeasurable, and therefore the above equation is meaningless in SP.

arXiv:1207.6352•Jul 26, 2012•0 citations

Bell's Theorem: A Critique

M. R. Clover

By implicitly assuming that all possible Bell-measurements occur simultaneously, all proofs of Bell's Theorem violate Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This assumption is made in the original form of Bell's inequality, in Wigner's probability inequalities, and in the ``nonlocality without inequalities'' arguments. The introduction of time into derivations of these variants of Bell's theorem results in extra terms related to the time order of the measurements used in constructing correlation coefficients. Since the same locality assumptions are made in the Heisenberg-compliant derivations of this paper, only time-independent classical local hidden variable theories are forbidden by violations of the original Bell inequalities; time-dependent quantum local hidden variable theories can satisfy this new bound and agree with experiment. We further point out that factorizable wavefunctions have been used to describe some EPR experiments and can be used to describe others. These will generate local de Broglie-Bohm trajectories in the description of the data. This second, independent, line of argument also shows that violation of Bell's inequality is only evidence that Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle cannot be ignored.

arXiv:quant-ph/0502016•Feb 1, 2005•9 citations

A Logical Distinction Between Bell's Theorem and Bell Experiments: What Bell Tests Do and Do Not Establish

Pushpendra Singh

Bell's theorem is a conditional statement about theoretical models specified by a complete physical state $\lambda$. It shows that models satisfying measurement independence and a stochastic Bell-locality (factorizability) condition obey Bell inequalities. Bell experiments, however, do not directly observe $\lambda$ or the $\lambda$-conditioned probabilities appearing in that condition. They record analyzer settings, detector outcomes, and experimental metadata, from which they estimate operational joint distributions, marginals, correlations, and Bell statistics. We clarify the logical relationship between these two levels. The $\lambda$-conditioned factorization identity cannot be directly evaluated at fixed $\lambda$ from the operational record alone. Nevertheless, by marginalizing over $\lambda$ under measurement independence, the model class implies observable inequalities that can be empirically violated. A Bell-inequality violation therefore excludes the corresponding Bell-local model class under the assumptions required for the inequality, but it does not by itself identify which latent assumption---measurement independence, parameter independence, or outcome independence---failed, nor does it uniquely determine an ontological interpretation. To illustrate this distinction concretely, we employ the Unified Quantum Mechanics formulation, in which the physical state is real, and the complex wavefunction is representational. We show that all four formulations of the dynamics---Schr\"odinger, Hilbert-transform, complex second-order, and real second-order---require the same two real initial functions $u_0=u(0)$ and $u_1=\partial_t u(0)$; the complex initial state is merely a repackaging of them, not additional physical information. We formulate the distinction as a three-level hierarchy: operational data, model-class exclusion, and ontological interpretation. The hierarchy separates experimental loopholes, which concern assumptions linking an actual experiment to an ideal Bell model, from the conceptual underdetermination of latent-variable conditional probabilities, which remains even in a loophole-free experiment. The result clarifies what Bell experiments establish without claiming that Bell-local models are empirically untestable. A Monte Carlo simulation illustrates the distinction between operational Bell-test results and latent-state factorization.

•Oct 2, 2026•0 citations

The fail of determinism and the limits of Bohm hidden variable theory

Ramón Lapiedra

We give a counter example to show that determinism as such is in contradiction to quantum mechanics. More precisely, we consider a simple quantum system and its environment, including the measurement device, and make the assumption that the time evolution of the global system, the quantum system plus this environment, is deterministic, i. e., the time evolution is given by a dynamical trajectory from some initial conditions. From this, we prove a type of Bell inequalities which are violated by quantum mechanics, reaching the conclusion that our quantum system evolves in a non deterministic way. In order to seize the interest of this conclusion, one must realize that it cannot be reached from the present experimental violation of Bell inequalities predicted by quantum mechanics, since this violation is compatible with non-local realism.

arXiv:0903.4339•Mar 25, 2009•2 citations
In classical theory, the trajectory of a particle is entirely predetermined by the complete set of initial conditions via dynamical laws. Based on this, we formulate a no-go theorem for the dynamics of classical particles, i.e., a Bell inequality for trajectories, and discuss its possible violation in a quantum scenario. A trajectory, however, is not an outcome of a quantum measurement, in the sense that there is no observable associated with it, and thus there is no ``direct'' experimental test of the Bell inequality for trajectories. Nevertheless, we show how to overcome this problem by considering a special case of our generic inequality that can be experimentally tested point-by-point in time. Such inequality is indeed violated by quantum mechanics, and the violation persists during an entire interval of time and not just at a particular singular instant. We interpret the violation to imply that trajectories (or at least pieces thereof) cannot exist predetermined, within a local-realistic theory.
This paper discusses a possible resolution of the nonobjectivity-nonlocality dilemma in quantum mechanics in 'the light of experimental tests of the Bell inequality for two entangled photons and a Bell-like inequality for a single neutron. My conclusion is that these experiments show that quantum mechanics is nonobjective: that is, the values of physical observables cannot be assigned to a system before measurement. Bell's assumption of nonlocality has to be rejected as having no direct experimental confirmation, at least thus far. I also consider the relationships between nonobjectivity and contextuality. Specifically, I analyze the impact of the Kochen-Specker theorem on the problem of contextuality of quantum observables. I argue that, just as von Neumann's "no-go" theorem, the Kochen-Specker theorem is based on assumptions that do not correspond to the real physical situation. Finally, I present a theory of measurement based on a classical, purely wave model (pre-quantum classical statistical field theory), a model that reproduces quantum probabilities. In this model continuous fields are transformed into discrete clicks of detectors. While this model is classical, it is nonobjective. In this case, nonobjectivity is the result of the dependence of experimental outcomes on the context of measurement, in accordance with Bohr's view.
Using CH model of Bell’s theorem and only by applying the conditional probability definition in ”classical ” probability theory,without imposing the locality condition,we are able to show that the stochastic realistic (CH) model cannot reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics. PACS number: 03.65.Bz It is generally claimed that Bell inequalities are inconsistent with experimental data and with the predictions of quantum mechanics.A condition often used in the derivation of Bell inequalities is the so-called locality condition.The temptation is to attribute Bell inequalities violation to the violation of locality. In this paper we are going
Bell's theorem rests on the following fundamental condition for a local system: P(a,b|alpha, beta, lambda)= P(a|alpha, lambda)P(b|beta, lambda). Here a and b are the outcomes respectively for measurements alpha on one side, and beta on the other, of an experiment involving two entangled particles traveling in opposite directions from a source. The parameter lambda (the set of "hidden variables") represents a more complete description of the joint state of the two particles. Because of lambda, the joint probability of detection is now dependent only on lambda and the local measurement setting of alpha; similarly for the other side and the setting beta. From this equation John Bell derived a simple inequality that is violated by the predictions of quantum mechanics, which is generally taken to imply that quantum mechanics is a nonlocal theory. But, by combining Richard Feynman's formulation of quantum mechanics with a model of particle interaction described by David Deutsch, we develop a system (the "space of all paths," SP) that (1) is immediately seen to replicate the predictions of quantum mechanics, (2) has a single outcome for each quantum event (unlike MWI on which it is partly based), and (3) contains the set lambda of hidden variables consisting of all possible paths from the source to the detectors on each side of the two-particle experiment. However, the set lambda is nonmeasurable, and therefore the above equation is meaningless in SP.
By implicitly assuming that all possible Bell-measurements occur simultaneously, all proofs of Bell's Theorem violate Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This assumption is made in the original form of Bell's inequality, in Wigner's probability inequalities, and in the ``nonlocality without inequalities'' arguments. The introduction of time into derivations of these variants of Bell's theorem results in extra terms related to the time order of the measurements used in constructing correlation coefficients. Since the same locality assumptions are made in the Heisenberg-compliant derivations of this paper, only time-independent classical local hidden variable theories are forbidden by violations of the original Bell inequalities; time-dependent quantum local hidden variable theories can satisfy this new bound and agree with experiment. We further point out that factorizable wavefunctions have been used to describe some EPR experiments and can be used to describe others. These will generate local de Broglie-Bohm trajectories in the description of the data. This second, independent, line of argument also shows that violation of Bell's inequality is only evidence that Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle cannot be ignored.
Bell's theorem is a conditional statement about theoretical models specified by a complete physical state λ\lambdaλ. It shows that models satisfying measurement independence and a stochastic Bell-locality (factorizability) condition obey Bell inequalities. Bell experiments, however, do not directly observe λ\lambdaλ or the λ\lambdaλ-conditioned probabilities appearing in that condition. They record analyzer settings, detector outcomes, and experimental metadata, from which they estimate operational joint distributions, marginals, correlations, and Bell statistics. We clarify the logical relationship between these two levels. The λ\lambdaλ-conditioned factorization identity cannot be directly evaluated at fixed λ\lambdaλ from the operational record alone. Nevertheless, by marginalizing over λ\lambdaλ under measurement independence, the model class implies observable inequalities that can be empirically violated. A Bell-inequality violation therefore excludes the corresponding Bell-local model class under the assumptions required for the inequality, but it does not by itself identify which latent assumption---measurement independence, parameter independence, or outcome independence---failed, nor does it uniquely determine an ontological interpretation. To illustrate this distinction concretely, we employ the Unified Quantum Mechanics formulation, in which the physical state is real, and the complex wavefunction is representational. We show that all four formulations of the dynamics---Schr\"odinger, Hilbert-transform, complex second-order, and real second-order---require the same two real initial functions u0=u(0)u_0=u(0)u0​=u(0) and u1=∂tu(0)u_1=\partial_t u(0)u1​=∂t​u(0); the complex initial state is merely a repackaging of them, not additional physical information. We formulate the distinction as a three-level hierarchy: operational data, model-class exclusion, and ontological interpretation. The hierarchy separates experimental loopholes, which concern assumptions linking an actual experiment to an ideal Bell model, from the conceptual underdetermination of latent-variable conditional probabilities, which remains even in a loophole-free experiment. The result clarifies what Bell experiments establish without claiming that Bell-local models are empirically untestable. A Monte Carlo simulation illustrates the distinction between operational Bell-test results and latent-state factorization.
We give a counter example to show that determinism as such is in contradiction to quantum mechanics. More precisely, we consider a simple quantum system and its environment, including the measurement device, and make the assumption that the time evolution of the global system, the quantum system plus this environment, is deterministic, i. e., the time evolution is given by a dynamical trajectory from some initial conditions. From this, we prove a type of Bell inequalities which are violated by quantum mechanics, reaching the conclusion that our quantum system evolves in a non deterministic way. In order to seize the interest of this conclusion, one must realize that it cannot be reached from the present experimental violation of Bell inequalities predicted by quantum mechanics, since this violation is compatible with non-local realism.