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:2211.11330

The Bell experiment; an epistemological approach

Inge Svein Helland

Published Nov 21, 2022• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The Nobel prize in physics for 2022 was given for performing Bell experiments with varying degree of sophistication. The interpretation of this experiment is discussed by first recalling Bell's simple argument behind his inequalities, in particular the CHSH inequality. It is argued that any independent observer must have a limitation: He is not able to keep all relevant variables in his mind at the same time when trying to model the experiment. This is contrasted to the solution proposed by Tim Maudlin, where nonlocality is crucial.Maudlin criticizes the Nobel price committee, but this critique is countered. Finally, a related new approach to the foundation of quantum mechanics is briefly sketched, giving references to the relevant literature.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2211.11330

Related papers

The Bell inequalities: Commentary on the Nobel Prize in Physics 2022

Hong-Yi Su, Jing‐Ling Chen

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 was awarded to three experiment physicists: Alain Aspect, John F. Clauser and Anton Zeilinger, for their contributions to “experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science”. In this paper, the history, basics, and applications related with the Bell inequalities are reviewed. The discussion of fundamental issues on quantum mechanics dated back to the year 1927 when the fifth Solvay conference was held, highlighting intense arguments between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. At the time, Einstein expressed, publicly for the first time, his critical attitude towards quantum mechanics. While the arguments did not reach a decisive conclusion, Bohr’s probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics, the Copenhagen interpretation, had since been well circulated among the community. Einstein’s arguments with Bohr lasted many years after the conference. The arguably most famous one was the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, proposed in a 1935 paper written by the three authors. They stated, by flawless reasoning, that quantum mechanics is ‘incomplete’. Bohr replied immediately. So did Erwin Schrödinger, who, in particular, coined the term ‘entangled’ for the first time to describe the bizarre quantum mechanical property. Nevertheless, the EPR paper received few citations at its publication, until 1990’s when quantum information science started blossoming. From today’s perspective, the paper resembles the ‘sleeping beauty’ who slumbered for decades before fully awakening. It has been widely accepted that it was John S. Bell who eventually resolved the EPR paradox. But many important figures before him should not go unnoticed, including John A. Wheeler, Chien-Shiung Wu, David Bohm, to name a few. In 1964, Bell wrote down a mathematical inequality which satisfies local hidden variable theory but which can be violated in quantum mechanics. The significance is that Bell’s inequality brings the rather philosophic debates on the EPR paradox down to be experimentally testable. Hence, an experiment is here appealing, as is the case in all fields of physics. To the end, John F. Clauser, alongside Stuart J. Freedman, conducted an experiment in 1972 to test a Bell inequality, the Bell-Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality, proposed by him and his collaborators in 1969. The results, however, leaves loopholes open. One of the loopholes was closed in a later experiment led by Alain Aspect in 1982. The Bell-CHSH inequality was later tested under a much stricter condition by Anton Zeilinger’s team. Two most important loopholes were both closed by three teams in 2015 independently. Zeilinger’s team was among them. Almost all experiments to date have confirmed quantum mechanical predictions. Zeilinger’s team also performed the first teleportation of unknown quantum states, the first entanglement swapping, along with other contributions pioneering the quantum information science. In retrospect, the foundational study of quantum theory has been developed over a century. It once drew much of quantum physics founders’ attention, went virtually unnoticed while other physical fields advanced, had for quite a while been considered to have very weak relationship with major physics, and finally revived in recent decades leading to rapid progress in quantum information science and quantum technology. We believe that the Nobel Prize in Physics this year is not only an award and recognition to past achievements, but also heralds a new era of science in future.

Chinese Science Bulletin (Chinese Version)•Oct 26, 2022•2 citations

2022 Nobel Prize in Physics and the End of Mechanistic Materialism. Part 1: Historical Overview

Igor Salom

The ideas and results that are in the background of the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics had an immense impact on our understanding of reality. Therefore, it is crucial that these implications reach also the general public, not only the scientists in the related fi elds of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this review is to attempt to elucidate these revolutionary changes in our worldview that were eventually acknowledged also by the Nobel’s committee, and to do it with very few references to mathematical details (which could be even ignored without undermining the take-away essence of the text). We fi rst look into the foundational disputes between Einstein and Bohr about the nature of quantum mechanics, which culminated in the so-called EPR paradox – the main impetus for all the research that would ensue in this context. Next, we try to explain the statement of the famous Bell’s theorem – the theorem that relocated the Einstein-Bohr discussions from the realm of philosophy and metaphysics to hard-core physics verifi able by experiments (we also give a brief derivation of the theorem’s proof). Then we overview the experimental work of 2022 year’s Nobel laureates, which had the fi nal say about who was right in the debate. The outcome of these experiments forced us to profoundly revise our understanding of the universe.

Ideas and Ideals•Sep 26, 2024•0 citations

2022 Nobel Prize in Physics and the End of Mechanistic Materialism

Igor Salom

The ideas and results that are in the background of the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics had an immense impact on our understanding of reality. Therefore, it is crucial that these implications reach also the general public, not only the scientists in the related fields of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this review is to attempt to elucidate these revolutionary changes in our worldview that were eventually acknowledged also by the Nobel's committee, and to do it with very few references to mathematical details (which could be even ignored without undermining the take-away essence of the text). We first look into the foundational disputes between Einstein and Bohr about the nature of quantum mechanics, which culminated in the so-called EPR paradox -- the main impetus for all the research that would ensue in this context. Next, we try to explain the statement of the famous Bell's theorem -- the theorem that relocated the Einstain-Bohr discussions from the realm of philosophy and metaphysics to hard-core physics verifiable by experiments (we also give a brief derivation of the theorem's proof). Then we overview the experimental work of the last year's laureates, that had the final say about who was right in the debate. The outcome of these experiments forced us to profoundly revise our understanding of the universe. Finally, we discuss in more detail the implications of such outcomes, and what are the possible ways that our worldviews can be modified to account for the experimental facts. As we will see, the standard mechanist picture of the universe is no longer a viable option, and can be never again. Nowadays, we know this with certainty unusual for physics, that only a strict mathematical theorem could provide.

arXiv:2308.12297•Aug 11, 2023•2 citations

An explanation of the Bell experiment

Inge Svein Helland

The Bell experiment is discussed in the light of a new approach to the foundation of quantum mechanics. It is concluded from the basic model that the mind of any observer must be limited in some way: In certain contexts, he is simply not able to keep enough variables in his mind when making decisions. This has consequences for Bell's theorem, but it also seems to have wider consequences.

arXiv:2305.05299•May 9, 2023•1 citation

On the Bell Experiment and Quantum Foundation

Inge Svein Helland

The Bell experiment is discussed in light of a new approach towards the foundation of quantum mechanics. It is concluded from the basic model that the mind of any observer must be limited in some way: In certain contexts, he is simply not able to keep enough variables in his mind when making decisions. This has consequences for Bell's theorem, but it also seems to have wider consequences.

•May 8, 2023•4 citations

On the Bell Experiment and Quantum Foundation

Inge Svein Helland

The Bell experiment is discussed in the light of a new approach to the foundation of quantum mechanics. It is concluded from the basic model that the mind of any observer must be limited in some way: In certain contexts, he is simply not able to keep enough variables in his mind when making decisions. This has consequences for Bell's theorem, but it also seems to have wider consequences.

Qeios•Aug 16, 2023•9 citations
The Nobel prize in physics for 2022 was given for performing Bell experiments with varying degree of sophistication. The interpretation of this experiment is discussed by first recalling Bell's simple argument behind his inequalities, in particular the CHSH inequality. It is argued that any independent observer must have a limitation: He is not able to keep all relevant variables in his mind at the same time when trying to model the experiment. This is contrasted to the solution proposed by Tim Maudlin, where nonlocality is crucial.Maudlin criticizes the Nobel price committee, but this critique is countered. Finally, a related new approach to the foundation of quantum mechanics is briefly sketched, giving references to the relevant literature.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 was awarded to three experiment physicists: Alain Aspect, John F. Clauser and Anton Zeilinger, for their contributions to “experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science”. In this paper, the history, basics, and applications related with the Bell inequalities are reviewed. The discussion of fundamental issues on quantum mechanics dated back to the year 1927 when the fifth Solvay conference was held, highlighting intense arguments between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. At the time, Einstein expressed, publicly for the first time, his critical attitude towards quantum mechanics. While the arguments did not reach a decisive conclusion, Bohr’s probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics, the Copenhagen interpretation, had since been well circulated among the community. Einstein’s arguments with Bohr lasted many years after the conference. The arguably most famous one was the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, proposed in a 1935 paper written by the three authors. They stated, by flawless reasoning, that quantum mechanics is ‘incomplete’. Bohr replied immediately. So did Erwin Schrödinger, who, in particular, coined the term ‘entangled’ for the first time to describe the bizarre quantum mechanical property. Nevertheless, the EPR paper received few citations at its publication, until 1990’s when quantum information science started blossoming. From today’s perspective, the paper resembles the ‘sleeping beauty’ who slumbered for decades before fully awakening. It has been widely accepted that it was John S. Bell who eventually resolved the EPR paradox. But many important figures before him should not go unnoticed, including John A. Wheeler, Chien-Shiung Wu, David Bohm, to name a few. In 1964, Bell wrote down a mathematical inequality which satisfies local hidden variable theory but which can be violated in quantum mechanics. The significance is that Bell’s inequality brings the rather philosophic debates on the EPR paradox down to be experimentally testable. Hence, an experiment is here appealing, as is the case in all fields of physics. To the end, John F. Clauser, alongside Stuart J. Freedman, conducted an experiment in 1972 to test a Bell inequality, the Bell-Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality, proposed by him and his collaborators in 1969. The results, however, leaves loopholes open. One of the loopholes was closed in a later experiment led by Alain Aspect in 1982. The Bell-CHSH inequality was later tested under a much stricter condition by Anton Zeilinger’s team. Two most important loopholes were both closed by three teams in 2015 independently. Zeilinger’s team was among them. Almost all experiments to date have confirmed quantum mechanical predictions. Zeilinger’s team also performed the first teleportation of unknown quantum states, the first entanglement swapping, along with other contributions pioneering the quantum information science. In retrospect, the foundational study of quantum theory has been developed over a century. It once drew much of quantum physics founders’ attention, went virtually unnoticed while other physical fields advanced, had for quite a while been considered to have very weak relationship with major physics, and finally revived in recent decades leading to rapid progress in quantum information science and quantum technology. We believe that the Nobel Prize in Physics this year is not only an award and recognition to past achievements, but also heralds a new era of science in future.
The ideas and results that are in the background of the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics had an immense impact on our understanding of reality. Therefore, it is crucial that these implications reach also the general public, not only the scientists in the related fi elds of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this review is to attempt to elucidate these revolutionary changes in our worldview that were eventually acknowledged also by the Nobel’s committee, and to do it with very few references to mathematical details (which could be even ignored without undermining the take-away essence of the text). We fi rst look into the foundational disputes between Einstein and Bohr about the nature of quantum mechanics, which culminated in the so-called EPR paradox – the main impetus for all the research that would ensue in this context. Next, we try to explain the statement of the famous Bell’s theorem – the theorem that relocated the Einstein-Bohr discussions from the realm of philosophy and metaphysics to hard-core physics verifi able by experiments (we also give a brief derivation of the theorem’s proof). Then we overview the experimental work of 2022 year’s Nobel laureates, which had the fi nal say about who was right in the debate. The outcome of these experiments forced us to profoundly revise our understanding of the universe.
The ideas and results that are in the background of the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics had an immense impact on our understanding of reality. Therefore, it is crucial that these implications reach also the general public, not only the scientists in the related fields of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this review is to attempt to elucidate these revolutionary changes in our worldview that were eventually acknowledged also by the Nobel's committee, and to do it with very few references to mathematical details (which could be even ignored without undermining the take-away essence of the text). We first look into the foundational disputes between Einstein and Bohr about the nature of quantum mechanics, which culminated in the so-called EPR paradox -- the main impetus for all the research that would ensue in this context. Next, we try to explain the statement of the famous Bell's theorem -- the theorem that relocated the Einstain-Bohr discussions from the realm of philosophy and metaphysics to hard-core physics verifiable by experiments (we also give a brief derivation of the theorem's proof). Then we overview the experimental work of the last year's laureates, that had the final say about who was right in the debate. The outcome of these experiments forced us to profoundly revise our understanding of the universe. Finally, we discuss in more detail the implications of such outcomes, and what are the possible ways that our worldviews can be modified to account for the experimental facts. As we will see, the standard mechanist picture of the universe is no longer a viable option, and can be never again. Nowadays, we know this with certainty unusual for physics, that only a strict mathematical theorem could provide.