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

Can Quantum Nonlocality be Explained Using (Complex) Maxwell Equations

Victor Christianto

Published Mar 1, 2014• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Quantum non-locality belongs to one puzzling feature of quantum mechanics, which some people think as unexplained using classical theories. But there seems a possibility to explain quantum non-locality using Maxwell equations or complex Minkowski metric. Therefore it seems worth to discuss this issue.

Related papers

Quantum Information and Locality

Dennis Dieks

The surprising aspects of quantum information are due to two distinctly non-classical features of the quantum world: first, different quantum states need not be orthogonal and, second, quantum states may be entangled. Non-orthogonality leads to the blurring of classical distinctions. On the other hand, entanglement leads via non-locality to teleportation and other ``entanglement-assisted'' forms of communication that go beyond what is classically possible. In this article we attempt to understand these new possibilities via an analysis of the significance of entanglement for the basic physical concepts of a ``particle'' and a ``localized physical system''. Classical particles can be individuated on the basis of qualitative differences in their sets of properties. But in entangled states the ``particle labels'' of the quantum formalism usually do not pick out such sets of individuating particle properties. It is sometimes nevertheless possible to think in terms of individual particles, which may be localized; but we argue that in general the structure of quantum mechanics is at odds with such a particle interpretation. This finally leads us to the conclusion that quantum mechanics is best seen as not belonging to the category of space-time theories, in which physical quantities are functions on space-time points. The resulting picture of the quantum world is relevant for our understanding of the way in which quantum theory is non-local, and it sheds light on the novel aspects of quantum information.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 24, 2017•5 citations

From Quantum to Classical: the Quantum State Diffusion Model

Nicolas Gisin, Todd A. Brun, M. Rigo

Quantum mechanics is nonlocal. Classical mechanics is local. Consequently classical mechanics can not explain all quantum phenomena. Conversely, it is cumbersome to use quantum mechanics to describe classical phenomena. Not only are the computations more complex, but - and this is the main point - it is conceptually more difficult: one has to argue that nonlocality, entanglement and the principle of superposition can be set aside when crossing the "quantum $\rightarrow$ classical" border. Clearly, nonlocality, entanglement and the principle of superposition should become irrelevant in the classical limit. But why should one argue? Shouldn't it just come out of the equations? Does it come out of the equations? This contribution is about the last question. And the answer is: "it depends on which equation".

arXiv:quant-ph/9611002•Nov 1, 1996•1 citation

Implications of Multidimensional Geometries and Measurement

Complexification of Maxwell’s equations with an extension of the gauge condition to non-Abelian algebras, yields a putative metrical unification of relativity, electromagnetism and quantum theory. This unique new approach also yields a universal nonlocality with implications for Bell’s Theorem and the possibility of instantaneous quantum connections because spatial separation can vanish by utilizing the complex space.

Series on knots and everything•Jul 1, 2009•0 citations

Quantum Correlations and Quantum Non-Locality: A Review and a Few New Ideas

Marco Genovese, Marco Gramegna

In this paper we make an extensive description of quantum non-locality, one of the most intriguing and fascinating facets of quantum mechanics. After a general presentation of several studies on this subject dealing with different but connected facets of quantum non-locality, we consider if this, and the friction it carries with special relativity, can eventually find a “solution” by considering higher dimensional spaces.

arXiv:1908.03114•Applied Sciences•Dec 10, 2019•34 citations

Some Thoughts on Quantum Nonlocality and Its Apparent Incompatibility with Relativity

Shan Gao

It may well be that a relativistic version of the theory, while Lorentz invariant and local at the observational level, may be necessarily non-local and with a preferred frame (or aether) at the fundamental level. – John Bell [1] Introduction Bell's theorem establishes a contradiction between locality (and a few other assumptions) and certain predictions of quantum mechanics [2]. There have been two main issues surrounding the deep implications of this celebrated theorem. The first issue is basic, and it concerns whether the theorem really establishes that nonlocality is a necessary feature of any empirically viable theory and hence a feature of nature itself. One aspect of the issue concerns exactly what the underlying assumptions of Bell's theorem are. For example, some argue that these assumptions include the assumption of counterfactual definiteness [3–5], while others disagree [6–8]. The other aspect of the issue concerns which assumption should be dropped due to the resulting contradiction. Some believe that standard quantum mechanics may avoid nonlocality by denying counterfactual definiteness [3–5]. The second issue is much deeper, and it concerns how to make sense of the strange nonlocality when assuming that Bell's theorem establishes that our world is nonlocal. In particular, it has yet to be determined whether such quantum nonlocality is compatible with the theory of relativity, e.g., whether the nonlocality requires the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame [7, 9, 10]. It seems that “there is a preferred frame of reference, and in this preferred frame of reference things do go faster than light … Behind the apparent Lorentz invariance of the phenomena, there is a deeper level which is not Lorentz invariant” [11]. But it also seems possible that the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame is an illusion, since it cannot be detected according to standard quantum mechanics. A more subtle issue is whether quantum nonlocality permits superluminal signaling. It is widely thought that the answers to these questions will lead to a deeper understanding of Bell's theorem and quantum nonlocality. In this paper, we will present a new analysis of quantum nonlocality and its apparent incompatibility with relativity.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 31, 2016•1 citation

The Complex Form of Relativistic Maxwell's Equations

We outline the relativistic formalism which gives a more comprehensive explanation of the complexification scheme. Such issues as considering the Higgs Boson as a soliton depends on Lorentz invariance and relativistic causality constraints. We relate the complexification of Maxwell's equations to models of nonlocal micro and macro phenomena. In this chapter we relate the electromagnetic fields, F and A , the potentials to the gravitational field, G . We examine, for example, the manner in which advanced potentials may explain the remote connectedness which is indicated by the Clauser test of Bell's theorem. Similar arguments apply to Young's double slit experiment. The collective coherent phenomena of superconductivity is also explainable by considering the relativistic field theoretic approach in which wave equations are solved in the complex Minkowski space.

Series on knots and everything•Mar 1, 2011•0 citations
The surprising aspects of quantum information are due to two distinctly non-classical features of the quantum world: first, different quantum states need not be orthogonal and, second, quantum states may be entangled. Non-orthogonality leads to the blurring of classical distinctions. On the other hand, entanglement leads via non-locality to teleportation and other ``entanglement-assisted'' forms of communication that go beyond what is classically possible. In this article we attempt to understand these new possibilities via an analysis of the significance of entanglement for the basic physical concepts of a ``particle'' and a ``localized physical system''. Classical particles can be individuated on the basis of qualitative differences in their sets of properties. But in entangled states the ``particle labels'' of the quantum formalism usually do not pick out such sets of individuating particle properties. It is sometimes nevertheless possible to think in terms of individual particles, which may be localized; but we argue that in general the structure of quantum mechanics is at odds with such a particle interpretation. This finally leads us to the conclusion that quantum mechanics is best seen as not belonging to the category of space-time theories, in which physical quantities are functions on space-time points. The resulting picture of the quantum world is relevant for our understanding of the way in which quantum theory is non-local, and it sheds light on the novel aspects of quantum information.
Quantum mechanics is nonlocal. Classical mechanics is local. Consequently classical mechanics can not explain all quantum phenomena. Conversely, it is cumbersome to use quantum mechanics to describe classical phenomena. Not only are the computations more complex, but - and this is the main point - it is conceptually more difficult: one has to argue that nonlocality, entanglement and the principle of superposition can be set aside when crossing the "quantum →\rightarrow→ classical" border. Clearly, nonlocality, entanglement and the principle of superposition should become irrelevant in the classical limit. But why should one argue? Shouldn't it just come out of the equations? Does it come out of the equations? This contribution is about the last question. And the answer is: "it depends on which equation".
It may well be that a relativistic version of the theory, while Lorentz invariant and local at the observational level, may be necessarily non-local and with a preferred frame (or aether) at the fundamental level. – John Bell [1] Introduction Bell's theorem establishes a contradiction between locality (and a few other assumptions) and certain predictions of quantum mechanics [2]. There have been two main issues surrounding the deep implications of this celebrated theorem. The first issue is basic, and it concerns whether the theorem really establishes that nonlocality is a necessary feature of any empirically viable theory and hence a feature of nature itself. One aspect of the issue concerns exactly what the underlying assumptions of Bell's theorem are. For example, some argue that these assumptions include the assumption of counterfactual definiteness [3–5], while others disagree [6–8]. The other aspect of the issue concerns which assumption should be dropped due to the resulting contradiction. Some believe that standard quantum mechanics may avoid nonlocality by denying counterfactual definiteness [3–5]. The second issue is much deeper, and it concerns how to make sense of the strange nonlocality when assuming that Bell's theorem establishes that our world is nonlocal. In particular, it has yet to be determined whether such quantum nonlocality is compatible with the theory of relativity, e.g., whether the nonlocality requires the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame [7, 9, 10]. It seems that “there is a preferred frame of reference, and in this preferred frame of reference things do go faster than light … Behind the apparent Lorentz invariance of the phenomena, there is a deeper level which is not Lorentz invariant” [11]. But it also seems possible that the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame is an illusion, since it cannot be detected according to standard quantum mechanics. A more subtle issue is whether quantum nonlocality permits superluminal signaling. It is widely thought that the answers to these questions will lead to a deeper understanding of Bell's theorem and quantum nonlocality. In this paper, we will present a new analysis of quantum nonlocality and its apparent incompatibility with relativity.
We outline the relativistic formalism which gives a more comprehensive explanation of the complexification scheme. Such issues as considering the Higgs Boson as a soliton depends on Lorentz invariance and relativistic causality constraints. We relate the complexification of Maxwell's equations to models of nonlocal micro and macro phenomena. In this chapter we relate the electromagnetic fields, F and A , the potentials to the gravitational field, G . We examine, for example, the manner in which advanced potentials may explain the remote connectedness which is indicated by the Clauser test of Bell's theorem. Similar arguments apply to Young's double slit experiment. The collective coherent phenomena of superconductivity is also explainable by considering the relativistic field theoretic approach in which wave equations are solved in the complex Minkowski space.