Our aim is to emphasize the role of mathematical models in physics, especially models of geometry and probability. We briefly compare developments of geometry and probability by pointing to similarities and differences: from Euclid to Lobachevsky and from Kolmogorov to Bell. In probability, Bell could play the same role as Lobachevsky in geometry. In fact, violation of Bell’s inequality can be treated as implying the impossibility to apply the classical probability model of Kolmogorov (1933) to quantum phenomena. Thus the quantum probabilistic model (based on Born’s rule) can be considered as the concrete example of the non-Kolmogorovian model of probability, similarly to the Lobachevskian model — the first example of the non-Euclidean model of geometry. This is the “probability model” interpretation of the violation of Bell’s inequality. We also criticize the standard interpretation—an attempt to add to rigorous mathematical probability models additional elements such as (non)locality and (un)realism. Finally, we compare embeddings of non-Euclidean geometries into the Euclidean space with embeddings of the non-Kolmogorovian probabilities (in particular, quantum probability) into the Kolmogorov probability space. As an example, we consider the CHSH-test.
Quantum superposition states are behind many of the curious phenomena exhibited by quantum systems, including Bell non-locality, quantum interference, quantum computational speed-up, and the measurement problem. At the same time, many qualitative properties of quantum superpositions can also be observed in classical probability distributions leading to a suspicion that superpositions may be explicable as probability distributions over less problematic states; that is, a suspicion that superpositions are epistemic. Here, it is proved that, for any quantum system of dimension
d>3 , this cannot be the case for almost all superpositions. Equivalently, any underlying ontology must contain ontic superposition states. A related question concerns the more general possibility that some pairs of non-orthogonal quantum states
∣ψ⟩,∣ϕ⟩ could be ontologically indistinct (there are ontological states which fail to distinguish between these quantum states). A similar method proves that if
∣⟨ϕ∣ψ⟩∣2∈(0,41) , then
∣ψ⟩,∣ϕ⟩ must approach ontological distinctness as
d→∞ . The robustness of these results to small experimental error is also discussed.
Recently quantum nonlocality has been classified into three distinct types: quantum entanglement, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering, and Bell's nonlocality. Among which, Bell's nonlocality is the strongest type. Bell's nonlocality for quantum states is usually detected by violation of some Bell's inequalities, such as Clause-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality for two qubits. Steering is a manifestation of nonlocality intermediate between entanglement and Bell's nonlocality. This peculiar feature has led to a curious quantum phenomenon, the one-way Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering. The one-way steering was an important open question presented in 2007, and positively answered in 2014 by Bowles et al., who presented a simple class of one-way steerable states in a two-qubit system with at least thirteen projective measurements. The inspiring result for the first time theoretically confirms quantum nonlocality can be fundamentally asymmetric. Here, we propose another curious quantum phenomenon: Bell nonlocal states can be constructed from some steerable states. This novel finding not only offers a distinctive way to study Bell's nonlocality without Bell's inequality but with steering inequality, but also may avoid locality loophole in Bell's tests and make Bell's nonlocality easier for demonstration. Furthermore, a nine-setting steering inequality has also been presented for developing more efficient one-way steering and detecting some Bell nonlocal states.