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

Physics Letters A

Locality and nonlocality in correlated two-particle interferometry

Mai Mai Lam, Christopher Dewdney

Published Nov 1, 1990• 20 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/0375-9601(90)90107-y

Related papers

A classical framework for nonlocality and entanglement

Gerhard Grössing, Siegfried Fussy, J Mesa Pascasio +1 more

Based on our model of quantum systems as emerging from the coupled dynamics between oscillating "bouncers" and the space-filling zero-point field, a sub-quantum account of nonlocal correlations is given. This is explicitly done for the example of the "double two-slit" variant of two-particle interferometry. However, it is also shown that the entanglement in two-particle interferometry is only a natural consequence of the fact that already a "single" two-slit experiment can be described on a sub-quantum level with the aid of "entangling currents" of a generally nonlocal nature.

arXiv:1210.4406•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•3 citations

Interferometry of Correlated Particles

Mark P. Silverman

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1995•0 citations

Fidelity and Coherence Measures from Interference

Daniel K. L. Oi, Johan Åberg

By utilizing single particle interferometry, the fidelity or coherence of a pair of quantum states is identified with their capacity for interference. We consider processes acting on the internal degree of freedom (e.g., spin or polarization) of the interfering particle, preparing it in states rho_{A} or rho_{B} in the respective path of the interferometer. The maximal visibility depends on the choice of interferometer, as well as the locality or nonlocality of the preparations, but otherwise depends only on the states rho_{A} and rho_{B} and not the individual preparation processes themselves. This allows us to define interferometric measures which probe locality and correlation properties of spatially or temporally separated processes, and can be used to differentiate between processes that cannot be distinguished by direct process tomography using only the internal state of the particle.

arXiv:quant-ph/0603157•Physical Review Letters•Nov 29, 2006•15 citations

Correlations and Entanglements II: Interferometry of Correlated Particles

Springer eBooks•Jan 4, 2008•0 citations

sComment on 'Local-realism violations in two-particle interferometry'

Jose Luis Cereceda

In a recent article [Phys. Rev. A 53, R1927 (1996)] Wu et al. give a proof of nonlocality for the maximally entangled state of two particles without using inequalities. Here we point out that in order for their argument to go through it is necessary to consider a minimum total of six dimensions in Hilbert space. Indeed, the above argument is found to fail whenever the dimensionality of the product Hilbert space is reduced to four. The explanation for this failure is provided by the fact according to which no direct contradiction between the quantum-mechanical and locally realistic predictions can arise for any fraction of an ensemble of 2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}2 systems configured in the maximally entangled state.

Physical Review A•May 1, 1997•2 citations

Introduction to Two-Particle Interferometry

Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, Anton Zeilinger

NATO ASI series. Series B : Physics•Jan 1, 1990•19 citations
Based on our model of quantum systems as emerging from the coupled dynamics between oscillating "bouncers" and the space-filling zero-point field, a sub-quantum account of nonlocal correlations is given. This is explicitly done for the example of the "double two-slit" variant of two-particle interferometry. However, it is also shown that the entanglement in two-particle interferometry is only a natural consequence of the fact that already a "single" two-slit experiment can be described on a sub-quantum level with the aid of "entangling currents" of a generally nonlocal nature.
By utilizing single particle interferometry, the fidelity or coherence of a pair of quantum states is identified with their capacity for interference. We consider processes acting on the internal degree of freedom (e.g., spin or polarization) of the interfering particle, preparing it in states rho_{A} or rho_{B} in the respective path of the interferometer. The maximal visibility depends on the choice of interferometer, as well as the locality or nonlocality of the preparations, but otherwise depends only on the states rho_{A} and rho_{B} and not the individual preparation processes themselves. This allows us to define interferometric measures which probe locality and correlation properties of spatially or temporally separated processes, and can be used to differentiate between processes that cannot be distinguished by direct process tomography using only the internal state of the particle.
In a recent article [Phys. Rev. A 53, R1927 (1996)] Wu et al. give a proof of nonlocality for the maximally entangled state of two particles without using inequalities. Here we point out that in order for their argument to go through it is necessary to consider a minimum total of six dimensions in Hilbert space. Indeed, the above argument is found to fail whenever the dimensionality of the product Hilbert space is reduced to four. The explanation for this failure is provided by the fact according to which no direct contradiction between the quantum-mechanical and locally realistic predictions can arise for any fraction of an ensemble of 2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}2 systems configured in the maximally entangled state.