We show that the axiom of choice , a basic yet controversial postulate of set theory, together with one of the pillars of our best physical theories, namely the no-signalling principle , may point to a limitation in modelling physical problems using standard mathematics. While it is well known that probabilistic no-signalling resources (such as quantum non-locality) are stronger than deterministic ones, we show—by invoking the axiom of choice—the opposite: functional (deterministic) no-signalling resources can be stronger than probabilistic ones (e.g. stronger than quantum entanglement or non-locality in general). To prove this, we devise a Bell-like game that shows a systematic advantage of functional no-signalling with respect to any probabilistic no-signalling resource.
We show that the axiom of choice , a basic yet controversial postulate of set theory, together with one of the pillars of our best physical theories, namely the no-signalling principle , may point to a limitation in modelling physical problems using standard mathematics. While it is well known that probabilistic no-signalling resources (such as quantum non-locality) are stronger than deterministic ones, we show—by invoking the axiom of choice—the opposite: functional (deterministic) no-signalling resources can be stronger than probabilistic ones (e.g. stronger than quantum entanglement or non-locality in general). To prove this, we devise a Bell-like game that shows a systematic advantage of functional no-signalling with respect to any probabilistic no-signalling resource.
The main claim of Baumeler et al. (Proc. R. Soc. A 481, 20240601; arXiv:2206.08467) is that "functional (deterministic) no-signalling resources can be stronger than probabilistic ones" in a certain nonlocal game on a Bell scenario with countably many parties. We disagree and argue that (i) under standard definitions, deterministic no-signalling resources are always probabilistic no-signalling resources; (ii) the deterministic strategy considered in Baumeler et al. can be promoted to a genuinely probabilistic strategy with similar properties; and (iii) a key step in a derivation in Baumeler et al., claimed to hold for all no-signalling strategies, implicitly assumes measurability, leaving a gap in the argument. We propose measurability assumptions which we conjecture would make this derivation rigorous. Taken together, the phenomenon highlighted by Baumeler et al. is best understood as a difference between measurable and non-measurable no-signalling resources.
In a world described by quantum mechanics, one cannot have determinism, no-signaling and free will all together. Under validation of all these three assumptions, together, the set of statistical correlations are bounded to the set of Bell local correlations. In standard Bell scenario any non-local correlation has a deterministic explanation if one either sacrifices free will or allows signaling. Recently in [Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 200401 (2012)] F. Buscemi generalizes the standard Bell scenario into `semi-quantum' Bell scenario. Interestingly, in this article, we show that in `semi-quantum' Bell game one can get correlations that cannot be obtained by giving up no signaling, alone; whereas such correlations can be obtained by sacrificing free will.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is one of the most famous features of quantum mechanics. However, the non-determinism implied by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle --- together with other prominent aspects of quantum mechanics such as superposition, entanglement, and nonlocality --- poses deep puzzles about the underlying physical reality, even while these same features are at the heart of exciting developments such as quantum cryptography, algorithms, and computing. These puzzles might be resolved if the mathematical structure of quantum mechanics were built up from physically interpretable axioms, but it is not. We propose three physically-based axioms which together characterize the simplest quantum system, namely the qubit. Our starting point is the class of all no-signaling theories. Each such theory can be regarded as a family of empirical models, and we proceed to associate entropies, i.e., measures of information, with these models. To do this, we move to phase space and impose the condition that entropies are real-valued. This requirement, which we call the Information Reality Principle, arises because in order to represent all no-signaling theories (including quantum mechanics itself) in phase space, it is necessary to allow negative probabilities (Wigner [1932]). Our second and third principles take two important features of quantum mechanics and turn them into deliberately chosen physical axioms. One axiom is an Uncertainty Principle, stated in terms of entropy. The other axiom is an Unbiasedness Principle, which requires that whenever there is complete certainty about the outcome of a measurement in one of three mutually orthogonal directions, there must be maximal uncertainty about the outcomes in each of the two other directions.
Characterising quantum correlations from physical principles is a central problem in the field of quantum information theory. Entanglement breaks bounds on correlations put by Bell's theorem, thus challenging the notion of local causality as a physical principle. A natural relaxation is to study no-signalling as a constraint on joint probability distributions. It has been shown that when considered with respect to so-called locally quantum observables, bipartite non-signalling correlations never exceed their quantum counterparts; still, such correlations generally do not derive from quantum states. This leaves open the search for additional principles which identify quantum states within the larger set of (collections of) non-signalling joint probability distributions over locally quantum observables. Here, we suggest a natural generalisation of no-signalling in the form of no-disturbance to dilated systems. We prove that non-signalling joint probability distributions satisfying this extension correspond with bipartite quantum states up to a choice of time orientation in subsystems.
We clarify the meaning of a probabilistic no-signalling strategy in Ref [Proc. R. Soc. A 481, 20240601]. For every fixed input, the deterministic strategy constructed using the Axiom of Choice can indeed be represented by a Dirac probability distribution over the outputs. The relevant distinction arises when one considers the complete process from input to output, with the input itself sampled according to a probability distribution. In this case, the input and output spaces must be measurable and the dependence of the conditional output distribution on the input must also be measurable. Equivalently, the conditional distributions must form a Markov kernel. The Axiom-of-Choice strategy fails precisely this measurability requirement.
Does "epistemic non-signalling" ensure the peaceful coexistence of special relativity and quantum nonlocality? The possibility of an affirmative answer is of great importance to deterministic approaches to quantum mechanics given recent developments towards generalizations of Bell's theorem. By generalizations of Bell's theorem we here mean efforts that seek to demonstrate the impossibility of any deterministic theories to obey the predictions of Bell's theorem, including not only local hidden-variables theories (LHVTs) but, critically, of nonlocal hidden-variables theories (NHVTs) also, such as de Broglie-Bohm theory. Naturally, in light of the well-established experimental findings from quantum physics, whether or not a deterministic approach to quantum mechanics, including an emergent quantum mechanics, is logically possible, depends on compatibility with the predictions of Bell's theorem. With respect to deterministic NHVTs, recent attempts to generalize Bell's theorem have claimed the impossibility of any such approaches to quantum mechanics. The present work offers arguments showing why such efforts towards generalization may fall short of their stated goal. In particular, we challenge the validity of the use of the non-signalling theorem as a conclusive argument in favor of the existence of free randomness, and therefore reject the use of the non-signalling theorem as an argument against the logical possibility of deterministic approaches. We here offer two distinct counter-arguments in support of the possibility of deterministic NHVTs: one argument exposes the circularity of the reasoning which is employed in recent claims, and a second argument is based on the inconclusive metaphysical status of the non-signalling theorem itself. We proceed by presenting an entirely informal treatment of key physical and metaphysical assumptions, and of their interrelationship, in attempts seeking to generalize Bell's theorem on the basis of an ontic, foundational interpretation of the non-signalling theorem. We here argue that the non-signalling theorem must instead be viewed as an epistemic, operational theorem i.e. one that refers exclusively to what epistemic agents can, or rather cannot, do. That is, we emphasize that the non-signalling theorem is a theorem about the operational inability of epistemic agents to signal information. In other words, as a proper principle, the non-signalling theorem may only be employed as an epistemic, phenomenological, or operational principle. Critically, our argument emphasizes that the non-signalling principle must not be used as an ontic principle about physical reality as such, i.e. as a theorem about the nature of physical reality independently of epistemic agents e.g. human observers. One major reason in favor of our conclusion is that any definition of signalling or of non-signalling invariably requires a reference to epistemic agents, and what these agents can actually measure and report. Otherwise, the non-signalling theorem would equal a general "no-influence" theorem. In conclusion, under the assumption that the non-signalling theorem is epistemic (i.e. "epistemic non-signalling"), the search for deterministic approaches to quantum mechanics, including NHVTs and an emergent quantum mechanics, continues to be a viable research program towards disclosing the foundations of physical reality at its smallest dimensions.