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

Demonstration of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen entanglement for an electron in a uniform magnetic field

Hong-Yi Fan, Zeng‐Bing Chen, Lin Jing-Xian

Published Jul 1, 2000• 7 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/s0375-9601(00)00405-9

Related papers

Experimental demonstration of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen entanglement in rotating coordinate space

Kai Wang, Dong-Sheng Ding, Wei Zhang +3 more

中国科学通报：英文版•Nov 14, 2019•8 citations

Demonstration of interferometer enhancement through Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen entanglement

Jan Südbeck, S. Steinlechner, M. Korobko +1 more

arXiv:1908.09602•Nature Photonics•Feb 10, 2020•55 citations

Representation of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Muons via the Novel Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Entanglement

Ruggero María Santilli

Series on knots and everything•Oct 1, 2023•0 citations

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Entanglement and Quantum Nonlocality for an Electron in a Uniform Magnetic Field

Fan Hong-Yi, Zeng‐Bing Chen

We show that there exists the precise Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen entanglement for an electron in a uniform magnetic field. Specifically, the x - and y -coordinates of the electron as well as the corresponding canonical momenta p x and p y become sharply correlated, which is a novel fact unnoticed before. When a harmonic potential is added to the system, the original vacuum state of the system becomes a squeezed vacuum state, whose quantum nonlocality is then demonstrated.

Chinese Physics Letters•May 1, 2000•4 citations

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Entanglement 1: Signatures of EPR correlations for continuous variables

M. D. Reid

A generalization of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument for measurements with continuous variable outcomes is presented to establish criteria for the demonstration of the EPR paradox, for situations where the correlation between spatially separated subsystems is not perfect. Two types of criteria for EPR correlations are determined. The first type are based on measurements of the variances of conditional probability distributions and are necessary to reflect directly the situation of the original EPR paradox. The second weaker set of EPR criteria are based on the proven failure of (Bell-type) local realistic theories which could be consistent with a local quantum description for each subsystem. The relationship with criteria sufficient to prove entanglement is established, to show that any demonstration of EPR correlations will also signify entanglement. It is also shown how a demonstration of entanglement between two spatially separated subsystems, if not able to interpreted as a violation of a Bell-type inequality, may be interpreted as a demonstration of the EPR correlations. In particular it is explained how the experimental observation of two-mode squeezing using spatially separated detectors will signify not only entanglement but EPR correlations defined in a general sense.

arXiv:quant-ph/0112038•Dec 7, 2001•2 citations

Experimental Demonstration of Electron-Photon Entanglement

Isobel Claire Bicket, Alexander Preimesberger, Bogdanov, Sergei +2 more

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations
A generalization of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument for measurements with continuous variable outcomes is presented to establish criteria for the demonstration of the EPR paradox, for situations where the correlation between spatially separated subsystems is not perfect. Two types of criteria for EPR correlations are determined. The first type are based on measurements of the variances of conditional probability distributions and are necessary to reflect directly the situation of the original EPR paradox. The second weaker set of EPR criteria are based on the proven failure of (Bell-type) local realistic theories which could be consistent with a local quantum description for each subsystem. The relationship with criteria sufficient to prove entanglement is established, to show that any demonstration of EPR correlations will also signify entanglement. It is also shown how a demonstration of entanglement between two spatially separated subsystems, if not able to interpreted as a violation of a Bell-type inequality, may be interpreted as a demonstration of the EPR correlations. In particular it is explained how the experimental observation of two-mode squeezing using spatially separated detectors will signify not only entanglement but EPR correlations defined in a general sense.