aqora

A reformulation and a possible modification of quantum mechanics and the EPR paradox

G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini, T. Weber

Il Nuovo cimento della Società italiana di fisica. B/Il Nuovo cimento BDec 1, 197619 citations

Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered incomplete?

Gilles Brassard A, André Allan Méthot

In loving memory of Asher Peres, we discuss a most important and influential paper written in 1935 by his thesis supervisor and mentor Nathan Rosen, together with Albert Einstein and Boris Podolsky. In that paper, the trio known as EPR questioned the completeness of quantum mechanics. The authors argued that the then-new theory should not be considered final because they believed it incapable of describing physical reality. The epic battle between Einstein and Bohr intensified following the latter's response later the same year. Three decades elapsed before John S. Bell gave a devastating proof that the EPR argument was fatally flawed. The modest purpose of our paper is to give a critical analysis of the original EPR paper and point out its logical shortcomings in a way that could have been done 70 years ago, with no need to wait for Bell's theorem. We also present an overview of Bohr's response in the interest of showing how it failed to address the gist of the EPR argument.In loving memory of Asher Peres, we discuss a most important and influential paper written in 1935 by his thesis supervisor and mentor Nathan Rosen, together with Albert Einstein and Boris Podolsky. In that paper, the trio known as EPR questioned the completeness of quantum mechanics. The authors argued that the then-new theory should not be considered final because they believed it incapable of describing physical reality. The epic battle between Einstein and Bohr intensified following the latter's response later the same year. Three decades elapsed before John S. Bell gave a devastating proof that the EPR argument was fatally flawed. The modest purpose of our paper is to give a critical analysis of the original EPR paper and point out its logical shortcomings in a way that could have been done 70 years ago, with no need to wait for Bell's theorem. We also present an overview of Bohr's response in the interest of showing how it failed to address the gist of the EPR argument.

arXiv:quant-ph/0701001Dec 30, 20063 citations

Spin-1 photons, spin-1/2 electrons, Bell's inequalities, and Feynman's special perspective on quantum mechanics

Masud Mansuripur

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox that argues for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics as a description of physical reality has been put to rest by John Bell’s famous theorem, which inspired numerous experimental tests and brought about further affirmations of quantum reality. Nevertheless, in his writings and public presentations, Richard Feynman never acknowledged the significance of Bell’s contribution to the resolution of the EPR paradox. In this paper, we discuss several variants of the Bell inequalities (including one that was specifically espoused by Feynman), and explore the ways in which they demolish the arguments in favor of local hidden-variable theories. We also examine the roots of Feynman’s attitude toward Bell’s theorem in the context of Feynman’s special perspective on quantum mechanics.The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox that argues for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics as a description of physical reality has been put to rest by John Bell’s famous theorem, which inspired numerous experimental tests and brought about further affirmations of quantum reality. Nevertheless, in his writings and public presentations, Richard Feynman never acknowledged the significance of Bell’s contribution to the resolution of the EPR paradox. In this paper, we discuss several variants of the Bell inequalities (including one that was specifically espoused by Feynman), and explore the ways in which they demolish the arguments in favor of local hidden-variable theories. We also examine the roots of Feynman’s attitude toward Bell’s theorem in the context of Feynman’s special perspective on quantum mechanics.

arXiv:2210.03365SpintronicsOct 3, 20223 citations

A critical analysis of N. Bohr's reply to the EPR argument

Yalçin Koç

Physics Letters AFeb 1, 19814 citations

Unsharp reality and joint measurements for spin observables

Paul Busch

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) reality criterion is generalized to fit with the notion of positive-operator-valued observables occurring in quantum optics, stochastic quantum mechanics, and other fields of quantum physics. The resulting concept of unsharp reality for quantum systems is illustrated within stochastic spin space where it leads to a notion of unsharp spin property. Finally we investigate the possibility of joint spin measurements and give a brief discussion of the EPR-Bell argument for unsharp spin properties.The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) reality criterion is generalized to fit with the notion of positive-operator-valued observables occurring in quantum optics, stochastic quantum mechanics, and other fields of quantum physics. The resulting concept of unsharp reality for quantum systems is illustrated within stochastic spin space where it leads to a notion of unsharp spin property. Finally we investigate the possibility of joint spin measurements and give a brief discussion of the EPR-Bell argument for unsharp spin properties.

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fieldsApr 15, 1986297 citations

A critical analysis of N. Bohr's reply to the EPR argument revisited

Yalçin Koç

Physics Letters ANov 1, 19811 citation

A Discussion of the EPR Contained in Quantum Mechanical Terms without Arguments of Realities or Bell's Relations

Related papers

A Discussion of the EPR Contained in Quantum Mechanical Terms without Arguments of Realities or Bell's Relations

Related papers